Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the Democratic Party was hijacked
SperoCite.com ^ | January 29, 2008 | SperoCite.com

Posted on 01/29/2008 3:29:25 PM PST by AstralisLux

How the Democratic Party, once supported heavily by Catholics, has become increasingly secularized since the 1960s.

(Excerpt) Read more at sperocite.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alinsky; catholic; communism; democratparty; democrats; gramsci; shadowparty; subversion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 01/29/2008 3:29:26 PM PST by AstralisLux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux

The Democrats are in the process of hijacking the Republican party too, with their Manchurian Candidate, John McCain.


2 posted on 01/29/2008 3:30:24 PM PST by counterpunch (Mike Huckabee — The Religious Wrong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

ping


3 posted on 01/29/2008 3:30:45 PM PST by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we write in marble. JHuett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kalee

What’s a ping?


4 posted on 01/29/2008 3:32:55 PM PST by AstralisLux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux
I was a democRAT from 78' to about 81'. My first election was Carter versus Reagan. I became a "Reagan democRAT" at that time. One day I realized that I would probably never vote rat, so I changed my affiliation permanently.

McCain may threaten my current affiliation however if he is nominated.

5 posted on 01/29/2008 3:34:45 PM PST by lormand (Paulrhoids(TM) - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux
"What’s a ping?"

It is like a "call" to another person on the forum.

6 posted on 01/29/2008 3:36:02 PM PST by lormand (Paulrhoids(TM) - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux

Author is only partially correct...

Catholics left in droves due to the abortion issue..

Mainstay of the Democrat party after 1972 isn’t secular humanism but socialism....


7 posted on 01/29/2008 3:36:19 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux

I think a major reason Catholics have drifted away from the Dems is that back in the day, Catholics were mostly working-class first- second- or third-generation immigration families. A natural Dem constituency. As they move up the economic ladder, they’re more open to the free-market positions of the Republican party. In my opinion, that’s a bigger motivator for the change in alignment than social issues.


8 posted on 01/29/2008 3:37:42 PM PST by mngran2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux

They have been touting themselves as the NEW Democrats for years now, the NEW is their socialist agenda called the Third-Way which can be found on the Democratic Leadership Council website (www.dlc.org) by doing a search.

They would love to goose-step to the forefront with Hellary but will take Obama!


9 posted on 01/29/2008 3:38:02 PM PST by PORD (People...Of Right Do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux
How the Democratic Party, once supported heavily by Catholics, has become increasingly secularized since the 1960s.

Hell the so called Catholic Colleges have suffered the same fate
10 posted on 01/29/2008 3:38:48 PM PST by uncbob (m first)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux; NYer

NYer has the Catholic list. He “pings” members to threads that might be of interest to Catholics. I thought he might be ping the list in this one, so was giving him a heads up.


11 posted on 01/29/2008 3:39:25 PM PST by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we write in marble. JHuett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux
I really don’t know what the heck happened.

I was a democrat in the 70s and mainly because I was a “working man,” and the dems were billed as “the party of the working man.”

Somehow that all changed and the party left me. Not the other way around.

I slowly came to realize that the democrat party was no longer the party of the working man - it became the party of the man who didn’t work.

12 posted on 01/29/2008 3:44:12 PM PST by bill1952 (The right to buy weapons is the right to be free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AstralisLux
Image hosted by Photobucket.com my family has been Catholic forever... and not a single RAT in the bunch!!!
13 posted on 01/29/2008 3:45:01 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

using the exact same pattern, socialists have taken over the church in which my family has been active parishioners for generations.


14 posted on 01/29/2008 3:45:32 PM PST by elpadre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED
Mainstay of the Democrat party after 1972 isn’t secular humanism but socialism

From Dictionary.com:

so·cial·ism 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

15 posted on 01/29/2008 3:49:03 PM PST by budwiesest (This is representation without representation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
It is interesting to read about this shift in the Democratic party from the Catholic point of view. I think the main shift was at the 1968 convention when the “Chicago Seven” had their demonstrations and the radical left took control of the Democratic party. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_National_Convention
The hawkish, more conservative wing of the Democrats left to become the “neocons” of the Republican party. So not only did the Democrats become more radically left at that time, but the Republicans developed more diversity.
That is the problem the Republicans are having today. There is a contest to see who will prevail, the true conservatives or the RINOS (Republicans in name only), who are conservative one one respect but not in others that are important to other members of a hopeful coalition. At least that is my simple minded view of what is going on.
16 posted on 01/29/2008 3:54:27 PM PST by broncobilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

“Catholic Democrat” seems to be an older demographic of those who have had an FDR “New Deal” kind of family background. Please, bear in mind that I refer here to serious Catholics who take the teaching of the Church seriously, not the “cafeteria Catholics” we often see.


17 posted on 01/29/2008 3:55:17 PM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: broncobilly

The Reagan Democrats coming onto the Republican Party seem rto have made the party overall more conservative and that has been pretty solid until it has finally unraveled since 2000.


18 posted on 01/29/2008 4:08:00 PM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them OVER THERE than to have to fight them OVER HERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PORD

I think X42 thought they said “Nude Democrats,” not “New Democrats.”


19 posted on 01/29/2008 4:22:49 PM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Global warming is to Revelations as the theory of evolution is to Genesis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: budwiesest
Redistribution began under Roosevelt....

Many of the policies prolonged the depression..by discouraging earning income...With top marginal income taxes higher than 90% who was gonna try to earn big bucks.

If you had it and sat on it you were in better position because interest income even at 1-2% was better than 95% taxation.

Not so much collective ownership but discouragement of private ownership and private entrepreneurship has been incrementally taking place since the 1940’s...

Now you have a huge nanny state..growing every day.

20 posted on 01/29/2008 4:30:16 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson