Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Why does a party against democracy call it's self the Democratic party?

1. Oppose the secret ballet in labor elections

2. Supports the legislating of unelected judges over elected representatives and the people

3. When they lose an election they go to those same unelected judges to get votes thrown out and keep recounting until they win, then stop all recounts.

4. support violating state election laws to get Al Gore elected, but when anyone else goes to the Supreme court to uphold the Constitution they are accused of having the court select the winner.

Update:

zaphod73, your knowledge of history/current events is as bad as your spelling. Coleman isn't the one who who had 300 ballets thrown out, that was Al Franken. Conservatives don't want judges legislating, Liberals do. That was my point, but you need reading lessons. Judges are only allowed to set president in the absence of a constitutional restriction And justification for a law, or ruling of a lower court.

Update 2:

The fact that Liberals lied by pretending to be Conservative is not a Conservative Presidents fault. Conservative dont apply litmus tests to be a judge

14 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The same reason that a party that is against the Republic calls itself the Republican Party.

    That issue apart, there IS NO LONGER a democracy in the United Sates. When you have one political party with two right wings which turns the electoral process over to a private corporation with no transparency (Diebold) there is no longer a democracy but the APPEARANCE of democracy to keep the masses in check. Neither is there freedom but the PERCEPTION of freedom because you have 200 TV channels and YouTube.

    The truth is that BOTH parties have been signed, sealed, bought and delivered by multi-billion dollar corporations. The misinformed who would label Obama a "Communist" or "Marxist" conveniently forget that Obama has appointed and surrounded himself with a bunch of financiers, bankers and the such, i.e. he appointed the same people who caused the financial crisis to fix it:

    * Treasury Secreaty, Timothy Geithner – Bilderberg Group (BG), Trilateral Commission (TC)

    * Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton – BG, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) married to TC member Bill Clinton

    * Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice – TC

    * National Security Advisor, Gen. James L. Jones – BG, TC, CFR

    * Dept. National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon – CFR, TC

    * Special State Department Envoy, Henry Kissinger – BG, TC, CFR

    * Chairman of the Economic Recovery Committee, Paul Volcker – BG, TC, CFR

    * Director of National Security, Adm. Denis C. Blair – BG, TC, CFR

    * Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates – BG, TC, CFR

    * Dept. Secretary of State, James Steinberg – BG, TC, CFR

    * State Department Special Envoy, Richard M. Hass – BG, TC, CFR (President)

    * Presidential Advisor, Alan Greenspan – BG, TC, CFR

    * State Department Special Envoy, Richard C. Holbrooke – BG, TC, CFR

    The "Federal" Reserve is only "Federal" in name and is in fact a privately owned corporation, not even the President can tell them what to do. These are the people that print and manage out currency:

    ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means, basically, that there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take. So long as that is in place and there is no evidence that the administration or the Congress or anybody else is requesting that we do things other than what we think is the appropriate thing, then what the relationships are don't, frankly, matter. And I've had very good relationships with presidents.

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec07...

    The people that expanded Eminent Domain to where a corporation (or private "interest") could confiscate your property was the Republican branch of the Supreme Court:

    Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZO.ht...

    "Every People have the rulers (government) they deserve."

    And we deserve no better, we let them blind us, and distract us with TV, fast food, beer, financial difficulties and the circus of celebrity deaths. Take your cue from the Iranian People (whom we vilify) who bravely put their lives on the line in defiance of an oppressive government.

    We, sit at home eating chips, guzzling Budweiser and moan and groan on Y|A as if that would make any real difference.

  • 1 decade ago

    3. Most of the judges in the Minnesota supreme court were chosen by republicans so the judges were mainly republicans. Both Coleman and Franken had ballets thrown out and some added.

    4. Al Gore wanted to recount all the votes. The Supreme Court didn't let them happen.

    Last time I checked when the supreme court choices who is the president along party lines instead of counting the votes in Florida that is called judicial activism or in your own terms "judges legistlating".

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    1. This is unequivocally not true...(A Conservative telling lies? Why am I not surprised?)

    2. Judges don't legislate and if you weren't so ignorant about the law you'd understand that it is the JOB of Appellate and Supreme Court Justices to further define and clairfy prior precedence (or overturn it based on legal grounds) or even to set precedence if none exists.

    3. Uhm, wasn't it Coleman who whined and cried for recounts over 4 times because he kept losing? Hm, you also need a recent History lesson.

    4. The Supreme Court is currently a Conervative Court having a 5-4 majority (which it will retain after Sotomayor's appointment). So, if you want to blame the Supreme Court for it's decision, blame the GOP President's who appointed them...DUH!!!!

    (FYI, I don't think you can make good wine with all thosse sour grapes...but you can make a sore loser whine.)

  • Matt W
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    You left out supporting Obama for appointing 34 unelected czars to take control of our lives and answer to no one.

  • jazz
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    To make it sound as if they serve the people. Sounds good, doesn't it. Behind the scenes though they owned by the communists. These days you can't tell the real commies from the "useful idiots" because there's so many "useful idiots" around.

  • 1 decade ago

    Good irony i suppose. What I find funny is most democrats have issues with the government and its amount of power yet voted for a man who wants to increase that power.

  • 1 decade ago

    Better then being a Facist Nazi like Republicans

  • Curt J
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    It's called 'Bait and Switch' and the Dems do it very well!

    Edit: Methinks lordpercy needs to learn to spell. That, or the rest of us don't know how, you decide!

    Source(s): Just my opinion
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    unelected judges are most better than elected. It was an automoatcic recount and you lost. your point 4 makes even less sence than the rest of your rant

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    You forgot the prefix Social. Now if you went one step further and added National we'd be in a load of trouble.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.