Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!alice!rabbit!jj From: jj@rabbit.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Democrats Versus Republicans Message-ID: <1764@rabbit.UUCP> Date: Fri, 5-Aug-83 11:39:37 EDT Article-I.D.: rabbit.1764 Posted: Fri Aug 5 11:39:37 1983 Date-Received: Sat, 6-Aug-83 08:16:06 EDT References: <15@orca.UUCP> Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill Lines: 59 What I like about these discussions about the difference between Democrats and Republicans is the way that each party's suporters argue. It seems to me that the Republican supporters argue using facts and logic (for the most part), and then the Democratic supporters call the Republicans a bunch of bad names, like "opressors of the middle class", "warmongers", or "anti-trade", or whatever. At the same time, they proclaim their intrangensence by stating that they will never vote for Reagan, a questionable (although certainly MOSTLY positive president) Republican. I think that the style of argument can only lead to one decision by any reasonable person, namely that Democrats are deluded, they deliberately use emotion instead of logic to decieve those less intellegent, and thus manage to be the REAL opressors of the middle, and lower class by the simple method of destroying freedom in the name of "justice". A good set of cases to point this out are the multitude of counter-productive social programs that encourage people to waste rather than produce, or to stay unemployed, merely because there is NO INCENTIVE whatsoever to get a lower class job, as they can keep the same lifestyle, using welfare perks. Undoubtedly the Democratic response is that I want to starve the poor so that they don't exist. This respose is nothing but a deliberate lie (and a knowing one) designed to manipulate lower class voters into voting democrat, even though the democrats only extend their slavery to the dole. (For those who don't call it slavery, I suggest any one of a bunch of books on hopelessness, and the results of a lack of self-respect.) What most democrats seem to deliberately not understand is that the Republican position is that there is already enough for everyone, if they're willing to work TOGETHER to get it. While the word together may seem to be counter to the anti-discrimination policies of a republican administration, I reply that the policies that support understanding rather than hate are much more effective in creating a stable equality, and that forcing individuals (including those who do not need to be forced) to be inferior because they are not a minority is NOT a way to maintain either a stable or safe situation. Bye-bye. I'm not going to bother following this discussions because I know that you democrats out there will just slobber all over in your haste to use quotes from this note that are extracted from context to demonstrate just the kind of emotional lie that you are expert in. I also know that (like the third law says) truth is easier to corrupt than falsehood, and representation much easier to destroy than deliberate misrepresentation, merely because detecting misrepresentation requires intellegence and training, which have been so lacking in the last 20 years in the public schools. I must say that I greatly resent the Democratic (and sometimes Republican) use of emotion to sway those who are less able to protect themselves. I think it reflects badly on both parties, but especially the Democrats, that they try to use ignorance, rather than try to ELIMINATE it. rabbit!jj