On September 24, the Georgia newspaper, The Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, published a letter to the editor by a reader who is obviously very upset at what she calls "the socialist wing of the Democrat Party".
I don't know what the writer has or has not read, so I can not refute some of her statements.
For example, this so called "socialist wing of the Democrat party" has stated that Sarah Palin showed unfairness to her pregnant daughter by accepting John McCain's invitation to be his running mate. It's quite possible that the writer actually read this somewhere. I am not familiar with any such rhetoric put forth by any member of the leadership of The Democratic Party or any of its candidates. However, there are lots of people who vote for Democrats and any one of them may have made the statement.
The writer must also have read that Palin's carrying a Downs Syndrome baby to term is what "angers the socialist wing of the Democrat Party the most." She states that this group has "said outright" that the child with Downs Syndrome, as well as Palin's grandchild, should have been "murdered".
As we've been told by a few people, the media is a "liberal media". This may be why I've never heard that a Democratic Party leader or candidate expressed anger over the existence any of the Palin children nor have I ever heard a Democratic Party leader or candidate suggest that anyone's children or child should be murdered. Since I don't know for certain whether the writer's charges are true or false, I cannot deny them.
There are a couple of points made in this letter that I can rebuff and, although very minor compared to the charges made by the writer, they may give us some insight into the writer's credibility.
First of all, I am very aware that some members of The Democratic Party want to bring back and/or reinforce many of the social programs created by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. These were programs that helped lift America out of what is today called The Great Depression of the late 1920s and early 1930s. These programs are referred to as social programs because Roosevelt saw an American society, "society" being a word derived from the same root word as the word "social", that was suffering. The percentage of unemployed American wage earners climbed as high as 25% in 1933. American society or, put another way, the social fabric of America was tattered and torn. Roosevelt helped American society by putting people to work fixing the infrastructure of the country, building bridges and completing other necessary tasks. He even created make work jobs which were overseen by the Work Progress Administration.
Although the programs put 8 million people to work, those who had managed to retain their wealth at the time criticized them because the federal price tag of $11 billion was too high. It meant that those who were still wealthy, or even wealthier due to The Great Depression, would have to let go of some of their wealth so that the American society could once again function economically. Roosevelt felt that what might be considered "trickle up" economics made sense. If the greater part of society was able to earn a decent wage, there would be a reason for corporations to exist, especially those corporations related to the banking industry. If there was a reason for corporations to exist, there'd be a demand for labor and, consequently, all Americans could move forward.
Of course, those few Americans who didn't want to part with any of their money to help the down and out called Roosevelt's actions "socialist". Maybe this is where the writer gets the wrong idea that there is a "socialist wing of the Democrat Party."
Indeed The Socialist Party of the United States may not only disagree with the writer that any part of The Democratic Party is socialist, but they may actually find it amusing that someone might believe that idea.
It didn't take me long to research my second point. I searched C-Span, The History Channel and the Library of Congress and absolutely nowhere did I find reference to any American political party named The Democrat Party.
We all know, of course, that disingenuous conservative pundits have taken to calling The Democratic Party "The Democrat Party". This, of course, is a small minded attempt to belittle The Democratic Party. In letters to the editor, and I've read my share, many writers who claim to support The Republican Party (or is it Republic Party) use the egregiously inaccurate phrase "Democrat Party".
Could it possibly be that this writer is transparent enough to give her political leanings away by calling The Democratic Party "The Democrat Party"? Is it possible that the writer made the same typo twice in her letter to the editor? Could it be that she really believes that the official name of the major political party in The FUSA which is not The Republican Party is actually "The Democrat Party"?One last possibility does exist. I've not read anything written by Democratic Party leaders that even remotely resembles what the writer has claimed. Could this possibly be because the statements were made by members of The Democrat Party, a party of whom I've never heard and, therefore, with whom I am not familiar?
Anybody know anything about The Democrat Party?