|
|
Posted by tm on 10/21/05 10:27
Tony Cooper wrote:
> tm wrote:
> > Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> The last line of the above paragraph could have been written during
>>> the administration of the first Republican president: Abraham
>>> Lincoln. It was as valid then as it is now.
> >
> >Technically, Jefferson was the first Republican Party president.
> >Lincoln was the first president of the modern-day Republican Party.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Democratic-Republican_Party
> >http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/tj3.html
>
> I understand that, but even political historians have trouble deciding
> who was the "first" Republican or the "first" Democrat.
No, no, historians have no problem with this. Jefferson was the first
Republican Party president. Lincoln was the first president of the
modern-day Republican Party. You are the one that's confusing yourself
with "first Republican" this and that. No offense, dude, but you
brought it up.
> It depends
> entirely on accepting the party the person belonged to as being the
> same party that is now described by that name.
> It isn't just the label of the party that is considered.
Sigh... there you go again.
> Stating that the aims of the current party - whichever one - are not
> consistent with the aims of original party members, or the aims of the
> so-called "founding fathers", is irrelevant. We really wouldn't want
> a political party to keep the same aims for over 200 years. The
> conditions have changed, so the aims should change.
Say, wtf are we arguing again? Weird tangents are always fun, but
since both of us seem to have limited attention spans, probably best
if we just stick to one argument at a time.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|