Maybe the point is that on the big life-threatening, constitution-threatening, labor-supporting issues of the time, there's no difference. For that matter, what's so great about the Democrats' health plan?
Bob --- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 2, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Robert Wrubel wrote:
>
> > Carl wrote:
> > "What a Bizarro World reading of political trends
> >> this article is. The overriding point is that
> the
> > Dems have become wholly Republican in POV."
> >
> > Partly true; partly not.
>
> I never know what to make of these claims. The Dems
> often really
> suck, but 1) they've always been good imperialists,
> and 2) though the
> New Deal and Great Society are long dead, there are
> still big
> differences between D and R on labor law, minimum
> wage, tax policy,
> and health care. Look at the current fight over
> expanding the Child
> Health program - Ds for, Rs against. As I keep
> saying, to no apparent
> effect, the differences between the two parties are
> wider now than
> they were in the 1950s and early 1960s. It's a
> mathematical fact.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>