TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

The Democratic party (officially founded in 1829) was an opposition to the Federalist. Today, they have turned 180 degrees from their founding principles and have become the Federalists. Below is the 1840 party platform.

1. Resolved, That the American Democracy place their trust, not in factitious symbols, not in displays and appeals insulting to the judgment and subversive of the intellect of the people, but in a clear reliance upon the intelligence, patriotism, and the discriminating justice of the American masses.
Resolved, That we regard this as a distinctive feature of our political creed, which we are proud to maintain before the world, as the great moral element in a form of government springing from and upheld by the popular will; and we contrast it with the creed and practice of Federalism, under wh**ever name or form, which seeks to palsy the will of the constituent, and which conceives no imposture too monstrous for the popular credulity.

Resolved, therefore, That, entertaining these views, the Democratic party of this Union, through their delegates assembled in general convention of the States, coming together in a spirit of concord, of devotion to the doctrines and faith of a free representative government, and appealing to their fellow-citizens for the rectitude of their intentions, renew and reassert before the American people the declaration of principles avowed by them on a former occasion, when in general convention, they presented their candidates for the popular suffrages.

1. That the Federal Government is one of limited powers, derived solely from the Constitution, and the grants of power shown therein ought to be strictly construed by all the departments and agents of the government, and that it is inexpedient and dangerous to exercise doubtful constitutional powers.

2. That the Constitution does not confer upon the General Government the power to commence or carry on a general system of internal improvements.

3. That the Constitution does not confer authority upon the Federal Government, directly or indirectly, to assume the debts of the several States, contracted for local internal improvements or other State purposes; nor would such assumption be just or expedient.

4. That justice and sound policy forbid the Federal Government to foster one branch of industry to the detriment of another, or to cherish the interests of one portion to the injury of another portion of our common country—that every citizen and every section of the country has a right to demand and insist upon an e******y of rights and privileges, and to complete and ample protection of person and property from domestic violence or foreign aggression.

5. That it is the duty of every branch of the government to enforce and practice the most rigid economy in conducting our public affairs, and that no more revenue ought to be raised than is required to defray the necessary expenses of the government.

6. That Congress has no power to charter a United States Bank, that we believe such an institution one of deadly hostility to the best interests of the country, dangerous to our republican institutions and the liberties of the people, and calculated to place the business of the country within the control of a concentrated money power, and above the laws and the will of the people.

7. That Congress has no power, under the Constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States; and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything pertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the Constitution; that all efforts, by abolitionists or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of s***ery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our Political Institutions.

8. That the separation of the money of the government from banking institutions is indispensable for the safety of the funds of the government and the rights of the people.

9. That the liberal principles embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, and sanctioned in the Constitution, which makes ours the land of liberty and the asylum of the oppressed of every nation, have ever been cardinal principles in the Democratic faith; and every attempt to abridge the present privilege of becoming citizens, and the owners of soil among us, ought to be resisted with the same spirit which swept the alien and s******n laws from our statute book.

Resolved, That the proceeds of the Public Lands ought to be sacredly applied to the national objects specified in the Constitution, and that we are opposed to the laws lately adopted, and to any law for the Distribution of such proceeds among the States, as alike inexpedient in policy and repugnant to the Constitution.

Resolved, That we are decidedly opposed to taking from the President the qualified veto power by which he is enabled, under restrictions and responsibilities amply sufficient to guard the public interest, to suspend the passage of a bill, whose merits cannot secure the approval of two-thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, until the judgment of the people can be obtained thereon, and which has thrice saved the American People from the corrupt and tyrannical domination of the Bank of the United States.

Resolved, That our title to the whole of the Territory of Oregon is clear and unquestionable; that no portion of the same ought to be ceded to England or any other power, and that the reoccupation of Oregon and the re-annexation of Texas at the earliest practicable period are great American measures, which this Convention recommends to the cordial support of the Democracy of the Union.


Read more at the American Presidency Project: Democratic Party Platforms: Democratic Party Platform of 1844 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29573#ixzz2ii2vDlit

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

Sorry, 1844 , spank me for my failure to type correctly.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

Now ain't that the t***h. Just since the 60's they changed so much they left me behind, sorta like the way Obama leads. Carter was the final straw, went indep from that point on.

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

I was really hoping Duck would have joined this discussion. In the past he identified himself as a conservative democrat. When asked about that he said he believes in the democratic principles the party was founded on. Then he turns around and bashes on the Tea Party.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

That is what got me interested in the Tea Party. Of couse today's liberal democrats have no idea what they were about.

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

I think the correct term for todays liberal democrat is "Progressive" (progressing towards what).

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

Progressing a complete take over, you'll (we'll) need to stop thinking!

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

I really was hoping to dialogue with a dyed in the wool democrat on this topic. Perhaps I should repost with a more enflaming title.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

Today's democrat is very disappointing to me and it seem they care for only themselves but then again maybe that's why their so quite?

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

Ah, it all boils down to those 12 Rules.
Since they can't refute the facts they'll choose to ignore it.

GERARD A. SANCHEZ Loc: Las Vegas, Nv. 89123

In 2010, 5 members Republican majority in our U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United Vs F.E.C. that U.S. Corporations are like individual citizens and they has the right to donate all the money they want to the political party of their preference and manipulate the e******ns, but WE THE PEOPLE don't have the money to compete with the special interes, and they elected members of U.S. Congress greedy, right-wing nuts, to protect their own interes, and passed the best laws money can buy.

TroubleshooterTim Loc: People's Republic of Oregon

Not quite the topic presented, but since nobody wants to engage on the actual post (that the Democrats have abandoned their founding principles) and made a 180.

Here is a summary of the ruling, lots of interesting issues to consider.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0124.htm

One prominent issue...are we to treat Unions with the same broad stroke of the brush?

GERARD A. SANCHEZ Loc: Las Vegas, Nv. 89123

TIM:
More than 13 years ago a Republican Senator JOHN McCain and a Democrats Senator FAINGOLD passed the U.S. E******n Financial Reform that limit the amount of money corporations and Labor Unions can donate to political parties and they had to disclosed who donated the money. In 2010 the 5 Republicans Justices in the U.S. Supreme Court declared the McCain-Faingold unconstitutional in the case Citizens United Vs FEC and ruled that corporations are like an individual citizen and can donate all the money they want to any political party without disclosing from where the money came from. Now big U.S. Corporations manipulate who is elected, and WE THE PEOPLE don't have money to compete with the Corporate world.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

As usual you tell stories. First it's Feingold, second the court struck down sections of the bill putting limits on corporations which had little effect, just more 527's sprung up.

jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI

And that is what made me into a Democrat when I had been a Republican for 40 years 1944-84, age 7 to age 47 when I realized the Republicans had become the present-day Jacksonians and original 1829 Democrats with "Reaganism" and had become "Republicans in name only," and I could become a Democrat because they had become "Democrats in name only" and become the present-day Federalists, Whigs, and the original Republicans.

So what did I have against the original Jacksonians that made me into a Democrat when I realized the Republicans had become Jacksonian? They were radical and they almost destroyed America. Where do you think the secessionist movement came from? From the extreme anti-federalist wing of the Jacksonians. Did you know that there was a major movement among northern Democrats to oppose federal action to preserve the union? Yes, federalism can be too extreme and too big and that must be guarded against. But also anti-federalism can be too extreme and go too far and become destructive and that must be guarded against.

Well, it's important that we have two parties as checks and balances, and each wing in American politics has contributed to what we are. Just because the present-day Democrats are in federalism line with Washington-Hamilton-Adams, Madison-Monroe-J.Q. Adams, Webster-Clay, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, FDR-Truman, etc. doesn't necessarily give the current line a free ticket to office. So what were the accomplishments of the Jacksonian line? First of all, they can be credited with much of the division of powers and reservation of spheres of decision that is the foundation of the American workable structure of independent & integrated central, various sub-unit, and individual action (and the potential workable structure for the world--in fact world structures WE set up after WWs I and II), Jefferson establishment of opposition party...in fact Madison and of the federal union who insisted on states rights provisions can be seen as in anti-federalism line & Jefferson-Madison-Monroe as consensus practice of limited federalism that, however, became so federalist that it caused Jacksonian insistence on return to "original principles."
The winning of the Southwest was a Jacksonian accomplishment with Webster-Clay-Whig opposition. That I can't see much more accomplishment from that side of American political thought than practice of two party checks & balances and needed hitting of pause and intermission buttons is perhaps partisan blindness to other contributions--too much emphasis on my part on highlight forward moments which are not the entire picture by any means. Besides, creation of balanced foundation structure and party to guard its core principles is perhaps more fundamental than all the inspiring forward moments in federal action made possible by the Constitution. And more important federal actions, the subject of partisan politics, is after all not more than a rather moderate part with regional, local, corporate, and individual actions that are America.

The "economics" of govt. bigness and complications, corporate bigness and complications, and individual life bigness and complications are so extreme and new that some of us are frustrated, fearful, etc. and tend to extremism and paranoia about it. Let's calm down.