Tuesday, September 07, 2004

2blowhards.com: Dems or Repubs? Feh

Great post from 2blowhards.com about the difference or lack there of between the two dominate parties in American politics. As I've posted and stated numerous times there really is no difference between the parties and these guys do a good job of exploring that topic.

The extent to which the parties have flipped positions on the little-guy/rich-guy divide is illustrated by research from the Ipsos-Reid polling firm. Comparing counties that voted strongly for George W. Bush to those that voted strongly for Al Gore in the 2000 election, the study shows that in pro-Bush counties only 7% of voters earned at least $100,000, while 38% had household incomes below $30,000. In the pro-Gore counties, fully 14% pulled in $100,000 or more, while 29% earned less than $30,000 ...

The financial pillars for Democrats are now super-rich trial lawyers, Hollywood entertainment executives, and megabuck financiers. Both parties have their fat cats, obviously, but Federal Election Commission data show that many of the very wealthiest political players are now in the Democratic column.

Today's most aggressive election donors by far are lawyers. As of July, law partners had donated $112 million to 2004 political candidates; by comparison, the entire oil and gas industry donated only $15 million. And wealthy lawyers now tilt strongly Democratic: 71% of their money goes to Democrats, only 29% to Republicans.

Wall Street, traditionally thought of as a GOP bastion, is no longer any such thing. Ultra-income brokers and bankers now give heavily to the party of Andrew Jackson. Six of the top 15 contributions to Democratic nominee John Kerry came from partners at firms like Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and J.P. Morgan.


more...

In a good piece (not online) for The American Conservative magazine, James Kurth argues that Leftie political elites root for French Englightenment ideals, and Rightie elites root for British Enlightenment ideals -- but that neither elite expresses the slightest bit of caution about Enlightenment absolutism:


Ever since the coming of the Enlightenment, Western elites have adhered to a variety of secularist and universalist faiths, which in effect have been religions without God ... The universalist ideology of Olympian elites is largely consistent with, and perhaps reflective of, the expanding interests of global corporations ... Those in the intellectual sectors are largely multiculturalists; those in the business sector are largely globalists; and those in the political sector largely represent these business and intellectual views. All adhere to the universalist ideology.


And they quote Andrew Sullivan's comments on Bush's speech...

Just remember all that Bush promised last night: an astonishingly expensive bid to spend much more money to help people in ways that conservatives once abjured ... I look forward to someone adding it all up, but it's easily in the trillions ... To propose all this knowing full well that we cannot even begin to afford it is irresponsible in the deepest degree. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the only difference between Republicans and Democrats now is that the Bush Republicans believe in Big Insolvent Government and the Kerry Democrats believe in Big Solvent Government.


Scary stuff these Bushie and Kerry clowns...eh?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home