Friday, January 26, 2007


What's in a Name...

During the State of the Union Address on Tuesday, President Bush refered to the opposition as the Democrat majority. And several Democrats, like always pleasant Paul Begala, objected to that. They want to be called the Democratic majority and the Democratic Party. Sorry, I'm not going to do it. The name of the members of the party don't transfer into an adjective because the name of the members merely is followed by the word 'party.'

I'll attempt to explain. The party on the right is of course the Republican Party. The members of the Republican Party are Republicans. It's not the Republicanic Party--it's the party of the Republicans, the Republican Party. Just so, it's the party of the Democrats, the Democrat Party. Democratic is an actual adjective, as in a democratic vote or a democratic process, and it's clear that the Democrats want us to think of them as that good thing, being democratic--even though we're a republic and not a democracy. Those uses of the adjective, however, have nothing to do with who belongs in the Party of the Democrats. I don't care what they want us to call them, I refuse to abuse proper grammar for the vanity and 'branding' of the lefties. Get over yourselves.

UPDATE: Other equally pompous about their names political parties in American history: The Federalistic Party; The Whigic Party, The Progressiveic Party 1912 (also know as the Bull Mooseic Party); The Greenic Party; The Farmeric-Laboric Party; the Greenbackic Party; and, the Anti-Masonic Party (that last one is real).


Are you suffering from overexposure to something? Perhaps nephrolithic pain?

"Republican" as in party is an adjective. Members of that party are "Republicans," which is a noun.

"Democratic" as in party is an adjective and the proper name of the party. The members of that party are "Democrats," which is a noun.

The president's misnaming of the party during the SOTU was either deliberate and mean spirited or another "Bushism" indicative of the same mind that not only determined that we should invade Iraq but who also badly prosecuted the war and the rebuilding of the country.

I shouldn't sign on to that so quickly if I were you. After all, if Iran has its way, there might be a "nucular " explosion.

I haven't read anything but this since this morning and am hoping your were going to comment on the conviction of Jason Reynolds.

Be well. I have to feed the Chinese.

No sale, Tony. God I hope you don't have to feed all the Chinese. Acidification before boring old Jason Reynolds. Patience my loyal reader.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?