Why don’t they drop the Democratic part instead. Socialist Party Of America is more precise. SPOA.

2Tru2Tru on May 20, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Yeah, really.

But, most Americans wouldn’t know what the Hell they mean by that anyway. Sorry, but we as a society are pretty damn ignorant. Somewhere along the line the American people abandoned the loftier goals of our Forefathers in favor of our most basic needs. We’re almost to the point where our ancestors would have been better off staying in Europe and continued being peasants on the estate of some lord.

We have no use for real knowledge nor real intellectual discourse. That’s boring. Only the basest stimulation and/or dulling of our central nervous system is important to most of us.

RNC abandons moronic resolution to rename Democrats the “Democrat Socialist Party”

I believe it’s a very valid issue, and point to make.

FACT…There are 58 members in the house of representatives that are card carrying socialists. They even caucus separately under the name “progressive caucus.” Progressives sounds less offensive than socialists. Progressive covers for who, and what they actually are and their agenda. So to label the democrats as socialists, isn’t as far fetched as it may sound.

Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM

Why do we proceed towards socialism despite myriad examples of its failure?

Because we as human beings lack the ability to learn until we’ve touched the stove, regardless how many people we’ve witnessed getting burned.

It will have to be dragged away from us, kicking and screaming. Our desire for the nanny state will bankrupt us and only then will we be forced to return to individual responsibility. The only thing that worries me is what kind of government will rise out of the ashes.

athensboy on May 20, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Gotta love his liberal use of the word “arse”. I’ll bet he uses the term “bollocks” a lot too. Maybe even feigns an interest in soccer.

Here’s a hint; watching “Trainspotting” twenty-five times does not make you worldly.

Now, for many Americans, they’re cool.

What about “National Socialist”? That is what the Nazis were. The Democrats, however, are internationalist and class conscious in their socialism. So, “Bolshevik Socialist” would be a good fit.

You would be, yet once again, completely incorrect.
progressoverpeace on May 20, 2009 at 7:33 PM

Ohhhhhh snaps!

Dear goopers, you can call us Democrats anything you want. Makes no matter. We kicked your arse in 2006, we kicked your arse in 2008, and we will kick your arse in 2010. Any questions?

athensboy on May 20, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Wow … you’re on a two year winning streak – grats. Hey I got a question – you guys own the shop now – when you gonna get the kahones to try the Bush crowd for torture? Why are you guys backpeddling on this? Are you girlymen or what?

Come on – we’re waiting – and DARING you do try the Bush administration.

A multimillion-dollar grassroots campaign to define Obama is needed.

TexasJew on May 20, 2009 at 8:06 PM

No more callers, please, we have a winner!

The Debtocratic Party

The Republcian party needs to be a party of ideas.

Daemonocracy on May 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM

If by “ideas” you mean reduce the size and scope of government, promote capitalism and trade and provide essential services such as national defense, I’m all for that. But if you mean we need to develop an alternative socialized medicine plan or a better cap-n-trade, screw that.

If the former, those aren’t new ideas. Freedom and liberty have been around since our nations founding. We just need Republicans to make the case, which they won’t—and they won’t call socialism by it’s name and they won’t close the primaries and they won’t put up conservative candidates.