 |
search this site: search the web: |
No legislation without representation! The Republicans would be too entrenched in the current government, Britian to risk their wealth for a silly thing like freedom. Why, the Republicans would be the loyalists of course. Loyal to the current reigning monarch (you heard it, MONARCH), most were also loyal to the Catholic church, weren't they? A bunch of gun-owning rich white men who wanted smaller government and lower taxes. Yep, sounds like the democrats to me. Maybe if we insinuate that the king of england is hitler he'll go away! Cherri learn your history. The British empire had their own church of England. They weren't a catholic nation.
by danny_mack on Wed Nov 17, 04 11:18pm
[+]
"gun-owning rich white men who wanted smaller government and lower taxes." I believe there's a better term for that called the Republican party. If Bush were king of England of course Republicans would be loyalists and Democrats would be patriots. Even without that, it seems Republicans are afraid of change sometimes.
by GS_NewWorldRuler on Thu Nov 18, 04 12:18am
[+]
Republicans would be Loyalist. Democrats would be Loyalist Lite. Benedict Arnold would be a card carrying member of the commu... I mean Democratic party. Yes the Minutemen. Gun owners and slave owners who were the patriots of the time. God fearing men and the creators of the America. Most definetly the Republicans would be the Patriots. It's the same today as well.
by Republican_RightWing on Thu Nov 18, 04 8:25am
[+]
Actually Republicans would have claimed to fight the war, but actually would have placed themselves in Administrative posts while getting all the poor people to fight for them. Well, apart from the small business part.
by GS_NewWorldRuler on Thu Nov 18, 04 12:38pm
[+]
Cdub: So all the soldiers that vote republican, they don't count right? Look at it this way: the revolution was a war, it would not have been successful if thousands of americans hadn't been willing to lay down their lives for their nation. Now, which party predominates in the armed forces? Couldn't have said it better Herzog
by Republican_RightWing on Thu Nov 18, 04 2:11pm
[+]
The slam was on Republican politicians, who with the exception of McCain, did everything they could to avoid fighting wars themselves but were only too happy to send someone else. The republicans would have been the loyalists because they are conservative; resistant to change. The democrats would have been the patriots because they are liberal; they would want change and progression. Jigsaw Only when it suits them. Actually jig the traditional definitions of conservative (wants to stay the same) and liberal (favors change) really are no longer relevent. Bush wanted a radical departure from the way things were going (lower taxes, preemptive strikes, break away from the UN, etc) the democrats wanted to keep things the way they were. Now who was in favor of change and who was in favor of the status quo there? But if you look at the policies supported by either party it's obvious who'd be the ones figthing to british, and who'd be the ones maybe possibly considering signing a polite petition to pretty please ask for independence. Carter recently said that the revolution was a waste of time and lives, can you imagine a republican saying that? Carter's getting a little old, I'm starting to wonder. The demoncraps would have tried to form a debating union while the world burned all around them. once they formed there little club they would get mad that noone listens to them. once they lost they would cry like little fucking bitches and say that they were going to move to canada. but then the canadians would tell them to go fuck themselves because we are not your refuge when you don't want to fight in a war or when you don't like how people voted. the demoncraps are the worst political party of murderers and racists that have ever been on the face of the earth.
by confidentconservativ on Sun Nov 21, 04 2:09pm
[+]
|