elfs: (Default)
[personal profile] elfs
George W. Bush's grandfather was once treasurer of Planned Parenthood USA.

The 1956 Republican Platform included a call for a equal pay between the sexes; vigorous enforcement of anti-trust laws and worker protection regulations; broadening Social Security and providing a better safety net for the uninsured; continued protection of America's wilderness areas; protections for Americans with disabilities.

Date: 2010-02-22 05:34 am (UTC)
ext_3294: Tux (Default)
From: [identity profile] technoshaman.livejournal.com
Elf, in 1956 the GOP was the *liberal* party. The Democrats were the *conservatives* until about 1966.

Date: 2010-02-22 05:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fayanora.livejournal.com
*Jaw drops*

Date: 2010-02-22 05:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fayanora.livejournal.com
How is it they can completely switch platforms and not change names? *Is utterly baffled*

Date: 2010-02-22 06:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] scyllacat.livejournal.com
I've never understood that myself. Apparently, it's just the color of the team jersey.

Date: 2010-02-23 06:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gromm.livejournal.com
Because the difference between a liberal and a conservative is that the conservative is 30 years older. Even if he's never changed a single thought.

Date: 2010-02-22 09:13 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nbarnes.livejournal.com
This is a gross oversimplification at best. Roosevelt was far more progressive and 'liberal' than the Republicans of his era. I'm not sure how you can describe the GOP of 1956 as a 'the liberal party'; both parties had liberals and conservatives. One of the defining characteristics of US politics of the time was the ideological incoherency of both parties. Which is how you had both parties featuring northeastern liberals and southern racialists.

Date: 2010-02-23 12:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_candide_/
I'm not surprised.

My first reaction to that statement about the GOP was, "Well, Roosevelt only died a decade earlier. The Democrats were almost certainly riding on FDR's and the New Deal's coattails. So, why wouldn't the GOP try to coopt some of those policies in milder form. It's the same thing as what's happening today, only in the the reverse direction.

Date: 2010-02-22 08:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] voidrandom.livejournal.com
It's highly informative to go over the Democrat and Republican policy platforms for each year from about 1960 to 1980. Gives a bit more insight into the current situation.

Date: 2010-02-22 05:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mikstera.livejournal.com
Could you share your conclusions? I'd be interested in hearing them.

Date: 2010-02-23 06:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gromm.livejournal.com
The 1956 Republican Platform included a call for a equal pay between the sexes; vigorous enforcement of anti-trust laws and worker protection regulations; broadening Social Security and providing a better safety net for the uninsured; continued protection of America's wilderness areas; protections for Americans with disabilities.

- Social security for WWII and Korean vets.
- Protection for those injured in said wars.

The rest of it sounds like a momentary brain fart on behalf of the party. I really have no idea how they planned to make equal pay for women work. We can't even manage that now, in these enlightened times.

Profile

elfs: (Default)
Elf Sternberg

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 12345 6
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 30th, 2025 11:27 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios