Why do Republicans remember more of our recent history then the Democrats?

Sure the Democrats have a history of selective memories if blanking out their role in history will hurt Bush. For instance it was Bill Clinton who first took up the cry that Saddam and his WMD's should be removed. Clinton's anti-Saddam/WMD/Nuke rhetoric was taken up by the rest of the Democratic party which is why they gave Bush approval to invade Iraq. When the war began to drag on and no WMD's were found the American public began to get restless. The Democrats then ignored their role in what led up to the war and put the blame on President Bush while calling him a liar. http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE

On Domestic Spying without a warrant, you would think that it was only Bush who ever ignored FISA when in fact Bill Clinton used electronic spying (Echelon) without a warrant following the 1993 WTC bombing.

http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id...

Bush uses torture in the form of waterboarding? How about electric shocks to the genitals? That happened under the Clinton administration only Clinton made sure that it happened outside the USA under the rendition program.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/rendition_prog...

http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=19452

Calm down, macjd527. And take a moment to consider your grammar. If yoda_alamoda had taken the trouble to cite examples, yes we would answer him. As it stands, I'm not sure exactly what yoda's asking. But no, I didn't sleep through history classes.

Ah, thank you, yoda, for the example. In the argument of which party deserves credit for civil rights, I'll remind you of dear Strom Thurmond. Even Senator Thurmond was once proclaimed and elected as a Democrat. It wasn't until the Civil Rights Bill of 1946 that Thurmond and his Southern counterparts broke away from their party to form the Dixiecrats. You'll remember the Dixiecrats as champions of states' right, of course - "states' rights" in this case being their right to remain bigoted segregationalists. Strom even ran as the Dixiecrats presidential candidate in 1948. His bid was unsuccessful, however, and because the Northern members of the Democratic party and Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson continued to support Civil Rights, Senator Thurmond officially joined the Republican party on September 16, 1948.

I'm not making a blanket statement against the Republicans, here. That was a dumb move on Hillary's part, or any liberal's part. No Civil Rights bills ever would have passed without support from Republicans. But don't call Southern Democrats racist detriments to the Civil Rights Movement when it was their disparagement for Civil Rights that drove them to the Republican Party.

Also, you'll remember that the labels of Republican and Democrat experienced a complete reversal in philosophy not long before this. President Lincoln, for example, would never be classified as a Republican by today's party standards. Nor would Theodore Roosevelt. So I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from making lump statements about either party's historical policies until you check into their actually philosophies at that particular point in history.

Republicans remember more of our recent history????

Do you think GW thought about Vietnam and the lessons learned before he invaded Iraq?

I doubt it. Again, another with little to offer for the debate. You really shouldn't try to pass such judgment when there is such a huge way to dispute it.

i don't know to which lessons of the past you are referring too. but times do change. i love Japan, if you learned from the past in the way you suggested then we should still be bombing them and Russia and the UK and every other country who has ever been against us.

Your question is specious.

It would be nice to cite examples. Otherwise this is pure rhetoric.

IF HE GAVE EXAMPLES WOULD YOU OF REALLY ANSWERED THE QUESTION ANYWAY

If you think so, but I beg to differ.

Could you possibly be any more vague?

okay, and I disagree.