Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (47307)	1/30/2008 12:22:03 PM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541872

"They are very aware of who is looking out for them and who is not." Imo that's an illusion.

To: koan who wrote (47307)	1/30/2008 12:25:12 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541872

I think elitist applies at least as well to the Democrats as it does to Bush or other Republicans. For example supporting higher taxes is elitist, because it implies that the politicians pushing the tax increases and deciding how the money will be spent are better at deciding what to do with the money than the people who earned it. He has favored the rich from day one. No he hasn't.

To: koan who wrote (47307)	1/30/2008 12:42:21 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541872

1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite. I know what "elitist" means. But "elite" means different things in different environments. It is simply a class of people who are regarded by themselves and/or others to be better than other classes. In some environments the smart or the strong are the elite, not the rich. Technocrats can be the elite, or professionals, or the academy. Or the beautiful people. The A List in Hollywood is an elite. Bush sure isn't one of them. The elite in Washington at one time were the academy. Pointy-headedness is out of fashion now. Bushs' economics professor called him an elitist (skull and bones at yale)and I believe most would agree. That's a class elite. Old money, old boys' network. Not the same as rich although most class-elite members come from money. All rich are not welcomed into that elite. Remember the put-down, "nouveau riche"? I think you mean "plutocratic." Or "richist." They are both varieties of elitism. "Elitist" just isn't specific enough to be useful. the Arican American has been horribly abused by this society. Yet another variety of elitism: racism. I'm sure that you recognize that the white supremacy movement does not correlate with wealth.

To: koan who wrote (47307)	1/30/2008 1:45:24 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541872

It wasn't the Republicans who lead the filibuster. "At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for 57 working days, including six Saturdays." senate.gov "The 1964 Civil Rights Act was an update of Republican Senator Charles Sumner's 1875 Civil Rights Act. In striking down that law in 1883, the Supreme Court had ruled that the 14th amendment was not sufficient constitutional authorization, so the 1964 version had to be written in such a way as to rely instead on the interstate commerce clause for its constitutional underpinning. Mindful of how Democrat opposition had forced the Republicans to weaken their 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts, President Johnson warned Democrats in Congress that this time it was all or nothing. To ensure support from Republicans, he had to promise them that he would not accept any weakening of the bill and also that he would publicly credit our Party for its role in securing congressional approval. Johnson played no direct role in the legislative fight, so that it would not be perceived as a partisan struggle. There was no doubt that the House of Representatives would pass the bill. In the Senate, Minority Leader Everett Dirksen had little trouble rounding up the votes of most Republicans, and former presidential candidate Richard Nixon also lobbied hard for the bill. Senate Majority Leader Michael Mansfield and Senator Hubert Humphrey led the Democrat drive for passage, while the chief opponents were Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, of later Watergate fame, Albert Gore Sr., and Robert Byrd. Senator Byrd, a former Klansman whom Democrats still call "the conscience of the Senate", filibustered against the civil rights bill for fourteen straight hours before the final vote. The House of Representatives passed the bill by 289 to 126, a vote in which 79% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats voted yes. The Senate vote was 73 to 27, with 21 Democrats and only 6 Republicans voting no." gopusa.com Vote totals Totals are in "Yes-No" format: * The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%) * The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%) * The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%) By party The original House version: * Democratic Party: 164-96 (64%-39%) * Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%) The Senate version: * Democratic Party: 46-22 (68%-32%) * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%) The Senate version, voted on by the House: * Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%) * Republican Party: 186-35 (80%-20%) en.wikipedia.org