That is a fact. But the GOP began to cast aside it's conservation legacy back in the 80's with Reagan and his appointment of James Watt as Interior secretary. Just as Nixon decided to embrace the segregationist Dixiecrats that had left the Democratic party, Reagan embraced the so-called "sagebrush rebellion" that opposed many of the conservation policies that had previously been supported by the GOP. The result is that today's GOP has repudiated and jettisoned the conservation legacy of Theodore Roosevelt.

Relk,

Don't confuse those Sleazbaggers and Repunants with facts, it goes completely against all the rhetoric coming out of their masters mouths!

Fishy

Yeah, don't pay any attention to conservatives or whatever they call themselves. We want the USSA and it's taking too long.
Vote for Barack Hussein Lenin Obama.

Well this certainly should make the teabaggers head explode!


http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/soaking-poor-state-state


Enjoy,

Fishy

Teabagger, another dumb label for those that cannot remember the
various segments of the politcal parties.
Got me a cup of Earl Gray. pretty good.

Sleazebagger= someone we would like to forget.

Another look into reality!

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph


Fishy

I sure dont. But when I think of the major governmenal initiatives the Ds sure win. Want a partial list?

Womens Right to Vote
Social Security
Civil Rights
Medicare
Peace Corps
National Health Insurance

The list is a lot longer. Show me some R accomplishments of equal weight.
Then ask if any of them would be acceptable to todays Rs. Hint EPA.

Dave,

You have forced me to investigate some. I'm not an addict on this kind of stuff, so I'll leave that to those who are.

That being said, I could find little evidence that the Republican Party, per se, has done much of anything in recent times which advocates the overall promotion of well-being of the general populace. Some of your list is also claimed by the Republican Party, however, but all of that was some time ago.
I'm on the fence as to whether that is a good thing, or a bad thing, or something of little or no importance. I know that that is a "set-up" statement, so before the opportunists jump (as many are eager to do, I'm sure......and some are probably peeing their pants in glee ), let me say this: I don't trust either Party. There are as many rich Democrats as there are rich Republicans in power positions, and that alone skews the truth to the point of un-recognizability. Knowing that either or both will willingly use misleading statements to promote themselves in politics, makes them all unbelievable. Just because something sounds good at first blush, does not necessarily make it a good thing. Even at the very ground level of consideration, doesn't one need to ask, "Can we afford it?" Considering our present mode of spending without regard to afford-ability, it seems to me to be a legitimate question. The answer is not nearly as simple as many would purport it to be, either, especially when part of the cost/benefit analysis involves questionable claims, and the effects of proposed changes.

Long story short, I guess I'm not as easily enamored as some, and am un-trusting of most forces in government when it/they reach beyond what I consider "helping". IMO, government is supposed to be there to assist, not control. I think that is consistent with my distaste for "law enforcement officers" over "peace officers".

edit: forgot to add this interesting recent article concerning recent EPA "strong-arming"....... contractors beware

sshhhh libtards always get their panties in a crack when presented
with facts they don't like.

Nice obfuscation. But the fact remains liberals pushed for and passed all of the above . The Rs came on board reluctantly when they saw they had too. It is now much the same with gay marrige and gays in the military.

As Lyndon Johnson said when signing the civil rights act We have lost the south for a generation. He was right of course which is why the south remains so solidly republican to this day.

Make up your mind Hank is SS a good thing or not? You Rs attack it whenever given the chance, now you want to claim you were behind its passage?

Can you even imagine Rs pushing for womens rights?

The right has tried hard to rewrite history but facts are stubbon things. This clearly disproves one of the above contentions. The others are equally specious.


http://www.alternet.org/story/21004

Fdr did a good thing when he created SS even if it was a bit socialistic.
Managing the bureacracy is an entire different bag of worms. Dipping into
the fund for coins for the moment is destroying its' viability.

I can imaging Rs pushing for sufferage. I think you have them confused
with Islamists and Sharia Law.

Imagine all you want but here are facts!

Nineteenth Amendment





Many groups were opposed to women's suffrage at the time.
On January 12, 1915, a suffrage bill was brought before the House of Representatives but was defeated by a vote of 204 to 174. Another bill was brought before the House on January 10, 1918. On the evening before, President Wilson made a strong and widely published appeal to the House to pass the bill. It was passed by two-thirds of the House, with only one vote to spare. The vote was then carried into the Senate. Again President Wilson made an appeal, but on September 30, 1918, the amendment fell two votes short of passage. On February 10, 1919, it was again voted upon, and then it was lost by only one vote.

There was considerable anxiety among politicians of both parties to have the amendment passed and made effective before the general elections of 1920, so the President called a special session of Congress, and a bill, introducing the amendment, was brought before the House again. On May 21, 1919, it was passed, 42 votes more than necessary being obtained. On June 4, 1919, it was brought before the Senate, and after a long discussion it was passed, with 56 ayes and 25 nays. Within a few days, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan ratified the amendment, their legislatures being then in session. Other states followed suit at a regular pace, until the amendment had been ratified by 35 of the necessary 36 state legislatures. After Washington on March 22, 1920, ratification languished for months. Finally, on August 18, 1920, Tennessee narrowly ratified the Nineteenth Amendment, making it the law throughout the United States.[59]

The final states to ratify the 19th Amendment were Georgia, North Carolina, and Louisiana, in 1970 and 1971. South Carolina finally ratified it in 1973, but Mississippi not until 1984.


Note the foot draggers. Are those liberal states?


Now please list the accomplishmient of the conservatives Oh yeah, they blocked a lot of things.

Liberal and Conservative Accomplishments


Liberal and Cooperative Accomplishments

• Extending the vote and civil protections to all adult Americans.
• Unemployment Insurance and Social Insurance.
• Safe and inexpensive Food and Water through enforceable regulation.
• Hoover Dam, the Tennessee Valley Authority, REA – the Rural Electrification Authority, Electric Cooperatives, without which large parts of the country would have no electricity.
• The GI Bill and State sponsored Universities providing affordable education.
• The Soil Bank.

Conservative accomplishments








































































































































Still looking

Interesting to see your approach to polarizing the partys.
Kinda like the USSR when giving kudos to their inventors. They got the airplane, the plow and any other 19th and 20th century innovation.
We are busy doing the Brit dance. In England since the 1800s allegience to the party was and is much more important that being a Brit first and
a party hack second. Carry on.

I believe the GOP deserves credit for creating the National Park system. Of course that was when they were actually "conservative" and interested in protecting the natural environment, vs. the corporate one.

The Bush tax cuts simply kicked the can down the road so that our children will be paying that bill, and their children. Enjoy the benefits, but with a guilty conscience. Oh, I forgot, conservatives don't have consciences.

There is a shred of truth in what you say. Certainly not about what liberals have accomplished vs. conservatives. Those facts remain.

But as far as dividing the parties. Wow, I didn’t know I was so powerful, but there is the kernel of truth in what you say.

I used a poor choice of words when talking about republicans and democrats. I should have stuck with liberals vs. conservatives. Because there were conservative democrats who were not in favor of civil rights, women’s, rights, gay right etc. Many of those were southern democrats who later found that the republicans more closely matched their views than did the democrats. Hnece the solidly republican south of today.

And there have been liberal republicans such as Nelson Rockefeller and even in many ways Nixon and Roosevelt, who bucked the conservative wing of their party to support parks, environmental protections and battled against overpowerful corporations.

Today the ultra conservatives have damn nearly purged their party of moderates and I doubt there are any liberal republicans left in national offices. But I should have acknowledged that democrats can be conservative and at one time republicans could have been liberals. Today I am sure Ronald Reagan would be branded a RINO by the current crop of tea party conservatives.

Thank there are no ulta-liberals!

JG

Hard to understand the questions as worded, but if you are asking are there any ultra liberals - of course there are. There always are radical fringes. It's just that right now the radical right is driving the republican buss - off a cliff it appears. They hate Romney and have tried desperatly to love any one of the many really bad alternatives. In the end they will have Romnye but they will have to hld their noses to vote for him.

Imagine the Rs get to vote for the father of Obamacare. A man who has been pro abortion, pro unions and said global warming is real and man caused.

Oh, he changed his mind on all those. Heavens hes not a a flip flopper is he?

That's obviously because the conservatives dont believe in evolution!!!

Right wing teabagger pandering that causes opinion changes from ones supported by facts and logic to retarded opinions intended to garner votes from idiots and morons is hard to call "evoloving"...it's called "dumbing down", which is doublespeak for "right wing speeches" coming from the ClownFest.

Fish on...

Todd