"No significant difference between Democrats and Republicans?" There may not be enough, but there's still plenty !

"Vote-Smart" is the premier, non-partison organization in a America dedicating to collecting and disseminating objective data to enable voters in America to be as informed of possible in their voting.  To obtain the ratings for the parties as described here, and so provide informed answers to the question or how similar or dissimilar the Democratic and Republican parties are, the most recent reports for every special interest group listed at www.Vote-Smart.Org were reviewed and aggregated into averages according to each group's individual ratings of the Congressmembers of the two parties.  The whole purpose of these groups is to know the two parties inside and out, to try to influence the votes of their congress members, and to keep score as to which congress members their own groups members should be told to reward and supported and which which need to be opposed and punished. Job Growth Rates under recent presidents: President % Growth in # years Johnson (D) 3.8% in 5 Carter (D) 3.1% in 4 Clinton (D) 2.4% in 8 Kennedy (D) 2.3% in 3 Nixon (R) 2.3% in 5 Reagan (R) 2.1% in 8 Bush-I (R) 0.6% in 4 ( Bureau of Labor Statistics )         Of particular interest is whether the average ratings for the parties fall above or below fifty percent for each group – that is, whether the party votes with the wishes of a given special interest group more often than not or whether the party votes against that group's wishes more often than it does with them.         After combining these ratings in this way, the question then becomes whether any difference can be seen in the way the two parties vote.  Do the numbers reveal any useful information about the parties' voting patterns?  Is there a reason for those disillusioned with the political process to hope?         And the answer? A profound, emphatic, resounding, definite: YES!         Yes, there is a huge chasm between the way most of the members of the two major parties vote on many issues.  Vote-Smart.org lists 107 different ratings.  Of these, fully 93 found the parties stratified on either side of the fifty percent mark, one supporting a particular interest, and the other opposed to that same interest.         Furthermore, not only did an overwhelming majority of groups find the parties to be on opposite sides of their issues, but the difference between their positions is normally huge.  The average spread between the ratings that any group assigned to the parties was 55 percentage points.  The parties do not simply differ slightly on the issues – they often differ like night and day.         What's most instructive are the particular groups that found the parties to be voting with their wishes.  Looking at those groups, together with their self-described missions produces a composite view of the positions of the parties.         I have not updated the figures on this page since the year 2002, but there hasn't been any need to do so because the purpose of this page is to highlight the contrast between the two parties, and if anything that contrast has only grown in the period since this study was made.         The most glaring disparity between the parties is regarding organized labor.  Sixteen different labor unions provide ratings of Congressmembers' voting, and all 16 – every last one – found that the Democratic Party voted in favor of the interests of the working men and women that they represent, while the Republican Party voted against those interests.  In fact, the most common rating individual Democrats in Congress received from labor unions was a perfect 100 percent – voting with that union every time.  In stark contrast, the most common rating any individual Republican received was a perfect zero, never voting with that union even once.  For example, of the 261 Democrats in Congress that the United Food and Commercial Workers union rated in 2001, 206 received a perfect 100 percent rating.  In contrast, of the 269 Republicans in Congress the UFCW rated in 2001, 232 received an unqualified zero.  It's as if the Republican Party has declared outright warfare on working people in this country.         "But what about business?" might come the rejoinder.  When that general charge has been expressed more narrowly, it translates to: "The Democrats and the Republicans are just two branches of the Business Party."  The facts show how totally untrue that charge is, and coming at this matter from opposite points of view, business and labor both say the same thing, i.e. that Republicans favor business interests, while Democrats favor workers interests.         Five different special interest groups are listed as representing business on Vote-Smart.org, and all five found the Republicans to vote with their interests while the Democrats vote against them.         As demonstrated by their voting records, Democrats are viewed by working people, women, seniors, African-Americans, Hispanics and consumers as the advocates for just and equitable working conditions, for civil rights, for protecting the environment, for reproductive freedom, for gun control, for education, for public health, and for humanitarian social policy.         And the Republicans?  The Republicans are viewed by big business opponents of taxes on business, or those who benefit most from business and opponents of government services to any entity other than businesses, as services require taxation to pay for them.  Perhaps they can best be defined by what they're against, rather than what they're for: they are against all those groups and all those social aims that the Democrats serve.  However much they might protest this characterization, their voting record speaks for itself.
It is the business of all of the groups below to know which political party best serve the interests of their own members, and to guide them as to which candidates to support and which to oppose. And these experts all agree on one thing : | | V | | V | | V There is a   HUGE   difference between the two major parties !
Special Interest Groups which see Democrats as their friends :         The following are groups that rated the Democrats as voting in favor of their interests much more often than the Republicans, along with the year(s) which the ratings cover.	Special Interest Groups which see Republicansas their friends ::         The following are groups that rated the Republicans as voting in favor of their interests much more often than the Democrats, along with the year(s) which the ratings cover.
American Federation of Government Employees, 2001 (labor) http://www.AFGE.org 93 % for Dems. vs. 8 % for Repubs. American Federation of Labor – Congress of Industrial Organizations, 2001 (labor) http://www.AFLCIO.org 93 % for Dems. vs. 16 % for Repubs. American Federation of State, County, & Municipal Employees, 2001 (labor) http://www.AFSCME.org 89 % for Dems. vs. 3 % for Repubs. American Federation of Teachers, 2001 (labor) http://www.AFT.org 93 % for Dems. vs. 11 % for Repubs. American Postal Workers Union, 2001 (labor) http://www.APWU.org 92 % for Dems. vs. 8 % for Repubs. Communications Workers of America, 2000 (labor) http://www.CWA-union.org 88 % for Dems. vs. 10 % for Repubs. International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 2001 (labor) http://www.IAMAW.org 92 % for Dems. vs. 18 % for Repubs. International Association of Fire Fighters, 1999-2000 (labor) http://www.IAFF.org 93 % for Dems. vs. 24 % for Repubs. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, 2001 (labor) http://www.boilermakers.org 97 % for Dems. vs. 40 % for Repubs. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 2001 (labor) http://www.IBEW.org 88 % for Dems. vs. 32 % for Repubs. Service Employees International Union, 2001 (labor) http://www.SEIU.org 87 % for Dems. vs. 23 % for Repubs. Transportation Communications Union, 2001 (labor) http://www.TCunion.org 97% for Dems. vs. 41% for Repubs. The Teamsters, 2000 (labor) http://www.teamsters.org 77% for Dems. vs. 9 % for Repubs. United Auto Workers, 2001 (labor) http://www.UAW.org 85 % for Dems. vs. 13 % for Repubs. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers, 2001 (labor) http://www.ranknfile-UE.org 78 % for Dems. vs. 7 %. United Food & Commercial Workers, 2001 (labor) http://www.UFCW.org 91 % for Dems. vs. 4 % for Repubs. American Association of University Women, 2001 (women) http://www.AAUW.org 95 % for Dems. vs. 10 % for Repubs. National Organization for Women, 1998 (women) http://www.NOW.org 77 % for Dems. vs. 11 % for Repubs. Alliance for Retired Americans, 2001 (seniors) http://www.RetiredAmericans.org 88 % for Dems. vs. 1 % for Repubs. National Association of Retired Federal Employees, 1999-2000 (seniors) http://www.NARFE.org 97 % for Dems. vs. 27 % for Repubs. National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare, 1999-2000 (seniors) http://www.NCPSSM.org 93 % for Dems. vs. 31 % for Repubs. National Council of Senior Citizens, 2000 (seniors) http://www.NCSCinc.org 91 % for Dems. vs. 8 % for Repubs. American Civil Liberties Union, 2001 (civil liberties) http://www.ACLU.org 72 % for Dems. vs. 14 % for Repubs. Human Rights Campaign, 2001 (civil rights, civil liberties) http://www.HRC.org 87 % for Dems. vs. 14 % for Repubs. Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, 1999-2000 (civil rights, civil liberties) http://www.CivilRights.org 89 % for Dems. vs. 27 % for Repubs. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 2001 (civil rights, civil liberties) http://www.NAACP.org 85 % for Dems. vs. 24 % for Repubs. National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, 2000 (civil rights, civil liberties) http://www.UnidosForAmerica.org/NHLA.html 90 % for Dems. vs. 29 % for Repubs. American Lands Alliance, 2000 (environment) http://www.AmericanLands.org 74% for Dems. vs. 11 % for Repubs. Comprehensive US Sustainable Population, 1999-2000 (environment) http://www.UScongress-enviroscore.org 64% for Dems. vs. 24% for Repubs. League of Conservation Voters, 2001 (environment) http://www.LCV.org 81% for Dems. vs. 15% for Repubs. National Parks Conservation Association, 1999-2000 (environment) http://NPCA.org/flash.html 84% for Dems. vs. 48% for Repubs. US Public Interest Research Group, 2001 (environment, consumers) http://www.PIRG.org 75% for Dems. vs. 16% for Repubs. Consumer Federation of America, 2000 (consumers) http://www.ConsumerFed.org 83% for Dems. vs. 40% for Repubs. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 1987-1999 (gun issues) http://www.BradyCampaign.org 80% for Dems. vs. 21% for Repubs. Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, 1999-2000 (gun issues) http://www.GunFree.org 56% for Dems. vs. 42% for Repubs. Handgun Control, Inc., 1993-1994 (gun issues) 79% for Dems. vs. 23% for Repubs. Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants, 1999-2000 (crime) http://www.CUREnational.org 62% for Dems. vs. 27% for Repubs. National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, 2001 (abortion, family planning) http://www.NARAL.org 80% for Dems. vs. 10% for Repubs. Planned Parenthood, 2001 (abortion, family planning) http://www.PlannedParenthood.org 82% for Dems. vs. 12% for Repubs. AIDS Action Council, 2001 (health) http://www.AIDSaction.org 93% for Dems. vs. 42% for Repubs. American Public Health Association, 2001 (health) http://www.APHA.org 90% for Dems. vs. 9% for Repubs. Children's Defense Fund, 2000 (family, children) http://www.ChildrensDefense.org 88% for Dems. vs. 44% for Repubs. National Education Association, 2001 (education) http://www.NEA.org 95% for Dems. vs. 30% for Repubs. US Student Association, 1995-1996 (education) http://www.USstudents.org 78% for Dems. vs. 9% for Repubs. Bread for the World, 2000 (social policy) http://www.bread.org 96% for Dems. vs. 18% for Repubs. Friends Committee on National Legislation, 2001 (social policy) http://www.FCNL.org 71% for Dems. vs. 16% for Repubs. National Association of Social Workers, 1999-2000 (social policy) http://www.SocialWorkers.org 86% for Dems. vs. 16% for Repubs. NETWORK, a national Catholic social justice lobby, 2000 (social policy) http://www.NETWORKlobby.org 74% for Dems. vs. 18% for Repubs. Zero Population Growth, 2001 (social policy) http://www.ZPG.org 83% for Dems. vs. 17% for Repubs. Americans for Democratic Action, 2001 (liberal) http://www.ADaction.org 87 % for Dems. vs. 9 % for Repubs. Public Citizen's Congress Watch, 2001 (liberal) http://www.citizen.org 85% for Dems. vs. 7% for Repubs. National Committee for an Effective Congress, 2001 (liberal) http://www.NCEC.org 85% for Dems. vs. 4% for Repubs. Humane Society, 2000 (animal issues) http://www.HSUS.org 70% for Dems. vs. 31% for Repubs. National Farmers Organization, 1991-1992 (farm) http://www.NFO.org 68% for Dems. vs. 37% for Repubs. Campaign for UN Reform, 2000-2001 (foreign policy) http://www.CUNR.org 83% for Dems. vs. 28% for Repubs. Council for a Livable World, 1999-2000 (defense, foreign policy) http://www.CLW.org 54% for Dems. vs. 17% for Repubs.	Associated Builders and Contractors, 2000 (business) http://www.ABC.org 10 % for Dems. vs. 93 % for Repubs. Business-Industry PAC, 2001 (business) http://www.BIPAC.org 16 % for Dems. vs. 89 % for Repubs. National Federation of Independent Business, 2001 (business) http://www.NFIB.com 21 % for Dems. vs. 96 % for Repubs. Small Business Survival Committee, 2000 (business) http://www.SBSC.org 15 % for Dems. vs. 86 % for Repubs. US Chamber of Commerce, 2000 (business) http://www.USchamber.com 49 % for Dems. vs. 81 % for Repubs. Americans for Tax Reform, 2001 (taxes) http://www.ATR.org 13 % for Dems. vs. 91% for Repubs. Citizens Against Government Waste, 2000 (taxes) http://www.CAGN.org 16 % for Dems. vs. 75 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute – budget, 1994 (taxes) http://www.CEI.org 12 % for Dems. vs. 78 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute – deregulation, 1994 (taxes) http://www.CEI.org 30 % for Dems. vs. 85 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute - spending, 1994 (taxes) http://www.CEI.org 13 % for Dems. vs. 66 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute - taxes, 1994 (taxes, spending) http://www.CEI.org 14 % for Dems. vs. 95 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute - totals, 1994 (economic policy) http://www.CEI.org 15 % for Dems. vs. 72 % for Repubs. Competitive Enterprise Institute - environment, 1994 (environment) http://www.CEI.org 17 % for Dems. vs. 74 % for Repubs. National Tax Limitation Committee, 1999-2000 (taxes, spending) 17 % for Dems. vs. 78 % for Repubs. National Taxpayers Union, 2001 (taxes, spending) http://www.NTU.org 15 % for Dems. vs. 67 % for Repubs. Liberty Lobby, 1999 (populist) 31 % for Dems. vs. 60 % for Repubs. [Note: This group is miscategorized. Their aims – lower taxes, less government spending, "protective" immigration laws – are more in keeping with conservatism than populism.] League of Private Property Voters, 2001 (property) http://www.LandRight.org 16 % for Dems. vs. 78 % for Repubs. Gun Owners of America, 2001 (gun issues) http://www.GunOwners.org 12 % for Dems. vs. 54 % for Repubs. National Rifle Association, 1993-1994 (gun issues) http://www.NRA.org 19 % for Dems. vs. 81 % for Repubs. Center for Security Policy, 1997 (defense, foreign policy) http://www.security-policy.org/latest.html 28 % for Dems. vs. 81 % for Repubs. National Right to Life Committee, 1999 -2000 (abortion, family planning) http://www.NRLC.org 19 % for Dems. vs. 88 % for Repubs. American Conservative Union, 2001 (conservative) http://www.conservative.org 17 % for Dems. vs. 84 % for Repubs. John Birch Society, 2001 (conservative) http://www.JBS.org 18 % for Dems. vs. 69 % for Repubs. Republican Liberty Caucus, 2000 (conservative) http://www.RLC.org 28 % for Dems. vs. 69 % for Repubs. Republican Liberty Caucus – social policy, 1999 (social policy) http://www.RepublicanLibertyCaucus.com 25 % for Dems. vs. 67 % for Repubs. Christian Coalition, 1999-2000 (Christian family issues) http://www.CC.org 18% for Dems. vs. 87% for Repubs. Family Research Council, 2001 (conservative religious) http://www.FRC.org 17 % for Dems. vs. 72 % for Repubs. Concerned Women For America, 2000 (women) http://www.CWFA.org 34% for Dems. vs. 84% for Repubs. [Note: This group is deceptively named, being more accurately titled the "Conservative Women of America" as their aims are more organized around conservatism than focused on the particular interests of women. ] The 60 Plus Association, 1999-2000 (seniors) http://www.60plus.org 29% for Dems. vs. 89% for Repubs. United Seniors Association, 2000 (seniors) http://www.UnitedSeniors.org 25% for Dems. vs. 93% for Repubs. [Note: These last two groups are also more accurately described as conservative groups rather than groups serving the particular interests of seniors. Insofar as their aims address the interests of seniors, they advocate against government programs to assist seniors and in favor of privatization – Enron-style retirement plans, for instance.] (Considering all these misleading interest group names, perhaps another conclusion to be drawn from this study is that Republican special interest groups often attempt to confuse the public and cloud the issues by presenting themselves with populist-sounding names to disguise their pro-corporatist anti-populist agendas.)

The chart below shows the whole Liberal vs. Conservative spectrum of the U.S. Senate for the year 2002 through the eyes of two of the groups that best represent each viewpoint, the liberal Americans for Democratic Action and the conservative American Conservative Union from the most liberal at the top down to the most conservative at the bottom.  Because they represent opposite viewpoints and come to opposite scores, there's no reason to doubt their accuracy. Scores given to Democratic Senators for Year 2002 by  ADA  by  ACU  (MA) Kennedy (MD) Mikulski (RI) Reed (MD) Sarbanes (MN) Wellstone (NJ) Corzine (IL) Durbin (VT) Leahy (MI) Levin (MI) Stabenow (I-VT) Jeffords (NY) Clinton (ND) Conrad (MN) Dayton (CA) Boxer (WI) Feingold (WA) Murray (MO) Carnahan (SD) Johnson (WV) Rockefeller (NM) Bingaman (ND) Dorgan (NV) Reid (NY) Schumer (OR) Wyden (WI) Kohl (SC) Hollings (MA) Kerry (CT) Lieberman (SD) Daschle (HI) Akaka (DE) Biden (WA) Cantwell (DE) Carper (CT) Dodd (HI) Inouye (NJ) Torricelli (IA) Harkin (CA) Feinstein (WV) Byrd (FL) Graham (MT) Baucus (IN) Bayh (NC) Edwards (FL) Nelson (LA) Landrieu (AK) Lincoln (GA) Cleland (LA) Breaux (NE) Nelson 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 5 % 95 % 0 % 95 % 0 % 95 % 0 % 95 % 0 % 95 % 6 % 95 % 10 % 95 % 10 % 95 % 11 % 90 % 5 % 90 % 5 % 90 % 10 % 90 % 15 % 90 % 15 % 90 % 15 % 90 % 20 % 90 % 20 % 85 % 10 % 85 % 10 % 85 % 15 % 85 % 15 % 85 % 15 % 85 % 20 % 85 % 20 % 85 % 22 % 80 % 0 % 80 % 10 % 80 % 25 % 80 % 25 % 80 % 5 % 80 % 0 % 80 % 6 % 80 % 15 % 80 % 20 % 75 % 15 % 75 % 20 % 75 % 37 % 70 % 30 % 70 % 30 % 70 % 30 % 70 % 35 % 70 % 40 % 65 % 35 % 65 % 42 % 50 % 55 % Scores given to Republican Senators for the Year 2002 :   by  ADA    by  ACU  (RI) Chafee (ME) Collins (PA) Specter (OR) Smith (CO) Campbell (GA) Miller (ME) Snowe (MS) Cochran (IL) Fitzgerald (AZ) McCain (VA) Warner (NM) Domenici (NV) Ensign (OH) DeWine (AK) Stevens (VA) Allen (MO) Bond (NH) Gregg (AL) Shelby (TN) Thompson (SC) Thurmond (AL) Sessions (ID) Crapo (NB) Hagel (IA) Grassley (NH) Smith (MT) Burns (WY) Enzi (OK) Inhofe (WY) Thomas (IN) Lugar (OH) Voinovich (UT) Hatch (AR) Hutchinson (PA) Santorum (CO) Allard (UT) Bennett (KS) Brownback (ID) Craig (TX) Hutchison (KY) Bunning (TN) Frist (TX) Gramm (NC) Helms (AZ) Kyl (MS) Lott (KY) McConnell (AK) Murkowski (OK) Nickles (KS) Roberts 45 % 53 % 35 % 55 % 35 % 50 % 35 % 75 % 30 % 88 % 30 % 47 % 30 % 65 % 25 % 90 % 20 % 78 % 20 % 78 % 15 % 79 % 15 % 88 % 15 % 85 % 15 % 95 % 10 % 83 % 10 % 84 % 10 % 84 % 10 % 85 % 10 % 89 % 10 % 89 % 10 % 90 % 10 % 90 % 10 % 94 % 10 % 95 % 10 % 95 % 10 % 95 % 10 % 100 % 10 % 100 % 10 % 100 % 10 % 100 % 5 % 90 % 5 % 90 % 5 % 95 % 5 % 95 % 5 % 95 % 5 % 100 % 5 % 100 % 5 % 100 % 5 % 100 % 5 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 % 0 % 100 %
Regarding the contrast between the two parties where religion is concerned compare and contrast the following :
JesusNoRepublican,org	JesusNoDemocrat,org
What do the opposites "Liberal" and "Conservative" really mean ?         If you were required to spell out the precise meaning of those terms, could you do it? Most people use these terms with only a vague idea of what they actually mean. I've given this matter a great deal of thought over many years and I believe that I have clearly defined precisely what these terms mean, when they are applied properly on the many pages of "Liberal" vs. "Conservative". I believe you'll find your own thinking much clearer after exploring this site.

How do Veteran Groups evaluate Republican vs. Democratic Legislators?         Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America is the nation's first and largest group dedicated to the Troops and Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the civilian supporters of those Troops and Veterans. They have members in all 50 states and no one has done more than them to advocate for the men and women serving our country in the front lines of our current war.         Disabled American Veterans has a very similar site. They appear to have used fewer votes to do their evaluations, and the results, though not identical, are similar. While the IAVA use letter grades from A down to F, the DAV use scores ranging from a high of 100% to a low of 20%.         The charts below were designed by me, Ray Dubuque, from information provided by their web sites to make it easier to see the contrast between Republican and Democratic politicians. I urge you to go to the original sites, http://IAVAaction.org and Disabled American Veterans legislative research, so as to see and appreciate the tremendous amount of work that went into documenting the legislative records of every last member of the current Congress (as of 2006). I challenge anyone who disagrees with their findings to point to anything comparable to back up his or her conflicting opinions. State Republican Senators : AL: Shelby = D  40% Sessions = F  40% AK: Stevens =   D  40% Murkowski =   D  40% AZ: McCain =   D 20% Kyl =   D- 60% CO: Allard =   D 60%   FL: Martinez =   D 60%   GA: Chambliss =   D- 60% Isakson =   F 60% ID: Craig =   D- 20% Crapo =   D 20% IN: Lugar =   D+ 60%   IA: Grassley =   D  40%   KS: Brownback =   D  40% Roberts =   D 60% KY: McConnell =   D 60% Bunning =   D-  40% LA: Vitter =   F 40%   ME: Snowe =   C 80% Collins =   C- 60% MN: Coleman =   D  40%   MS: Cochran =   D  40% Lott =   D 60% MO: Bond =   D  40% Talent =   D+ 60% MT: Burns =   D+ 60%   NE: Hagel =   D+ 60%   NV: Ensign =   D- 40%   NH: Gregg =   D  40% Sununu =   D  40% NM: Domenici =   D  40%   NC: Dole =   D- 60% Burr =   F 60% OH: DeWine =   D+ 60% Voinovich =   D 60% OK: Inhofe =   D- 40% Coburn =   F  40% OR: Smith =   C 50%   PA: Specter =   C 60% Santorum =   D-  40% RI: Chafee =   C 80%   SC: Graham =   D- 40% DeMint =   F 60% SD: Thune =   D+ 60%   TN: Frist =   D 60% Alexander =   D 40% TX: Hutchison =   D+ 60% Cornyn =   D- 60% UT: Hatch =   D 50% Bennett =   D  40% VA: Warner =   D+ 60% Allen =   D+ 60% WY: Thomas =   D  40% Enzi =   D-  40% State Democratic Senators : AR: Lincoln =   B+  80% Pryor =   B   100% CA: Feinstein =   B+  80% Boxer =   B+  80% CO: Salazar =   B   80%   CT: Dodd =   A-  80% Lieberman =   B+  80% DE: Biden =   B+  75% Carper =   B+  80% FL: Nelson =   A-  100%   HI: Inouye =   B   80% Akaka =   B+  80% IL: Durbin =   A-  80% Obama =   B+  80% IN: Bayh =   B+  80%   IA: Harkin =   B   80%   LA: Landrieu =   B+  80%   MD: Sarbanes =   B+  80% Mikulski =   A-  80% MA: Kennedy =   B+  80% Kerry =   B   75% MI: Levin =   B+  80% Stabenow =   A-  100% MN: Dayton =   A-  80%   MT: Baucus =   B   80%   NE: Nelson =   B-  60%   NV: Reid =   A-  80%   NJ: Lautenberg =   B+  80% Menendez =   B   80% NM: Bingaman =   B+  80%   NY: Schumer =   B+  80% Clinton =   A-  80% ND: Conrad =   B+  80% Dorgan =   A-  80% OR: Wyden =   B+  80%   RI: Reed =   A-  80%   SD: Johnson =   B+  100%   VT: Leahy =   B+  80% Jeffords (I) =   B+  80% WA: Murray =   A-  80% Cantwell =   A-  80% WV: Byrd =   B   80% Rockefeller = B+ 100% WI: Kohl =   A-  80% Feingold =   B   80%         As anyone can see, the lowest grade any Democratic Senator got (from the IAVA) was a "B-" and the highest grade any Republican got was a "C".         (And the Republicans who earned those C's were the handful of more "liberal" G.O.P. Senators, who are not considered "true Republicans" by the more orthodox party loyalists.)

What a difference the supposedly religious and "non-partisan" "Christian Coalition" sees between the political parties:

When people think of political corruption, they are probably aware of a number of scandals involving Democrats, but ask them to point to significant scandals involving contemporary liberal Democrats, as opposed to scandals dating back to the "good old days", when the Democratic Party was under the control of fat cat and/or Southern conservatives.  They won't be able to come up with anything near the corruption that has been rampant through most of the history of the Republican Party, as I lay bare at JesusNoRepublican.Org/about/gopcorruption.html. This page is so good that for years it has been one of the very top pages listed by Google in response to searches for "Republican corruption", and the like. I challenge Republicans and/or conservatives on that page to come up with a comparable list of corrupt Democrats and the results so far have been laughable.

These are the scores given a few years ago to the Leaders of the two political parties by five major organizations representing opposing interests :

ASC =	American Security Council			( Military interests )
COC =	Chamber of Commerce			( Business interests )
COPE =	Committee On Political Education			( Labor interests )
CFA =	Consumer Federation of America			( Consumer interests )
LCV =	League of Conservation Voters			( Environmental interests )
Group Ratings (from 1997:)	ASC	COC	COPE	CFA	LCV
Sen. Lott (GOP)	100	100	5	0	0
Sen. Nickles (GOP)	100	91	0	0	8
Rep. Hastert (GOP)	100	91	0	20	11
Rep. Armey (GOP)	100	100	0	0	9
Rep. Delay (GOP)	100	100	0	0	9
Rep. Archer (GOP)	100	91	0	0	17
Sen. Daschle (Dem)	20	20	63	90	77
Sen. Reid (Dem)	30	18	100	90	85
Rep. Gephardt (Dem)	40	9	89	100	67
Rep. Frost (Dem)	70	36	67	90	52
Rep. Bonier (Dem)	20	9	100	100	78
Where do Republicans get the gall to pose as more patriotic than Democrats ?  They have a habit of choosing as their leaders "ChickenHawks" – who send others to die in the wars they vote for, while they find excuses to stay home !         "Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives."  -  { author unknown }

More wealth and jobs created by Democratic administrations         From Harding In 1921 to Bush in 2003, Democrats held White House for 40 years, and Republicans for 42.5 years, during which time, 1. Democrats created 75,820,000 net new jobs and Republicans 36,440,000. 2. Per Year Average : Democrats = 1,825,200 vs. Republicans = 856,400. 3. There was either a depression or a recession during the administrations of 6 of the 9 Republican presidents . 4. The DOW grew by 52% more under Democrats, and 5. The GDP grew by 26.4% more under Democrats. Democrat President Bill Clinton versus Republican President Ron Reagan 1. 24% more jobs under Clinton 2. 64% greater GDP under Clinton 3. 500% higher growth in the DOW under Clinton 4. Clinton increased national spending by 28%,         while Reagan increased it by 80% 5. Clinton increased national debt by 28% ,         while Reagan increased it by 187% 6. Clinton produced a huge surplus,         while Reagan increased deficits by 112%         Sources : Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS.Gov)         – Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org) Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 www.the-hamster.com chart taken from NY Times National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov Contact : Clarence@LiberalsLikeChrist.Org         "the unemployment rate on the last day of the Truman, Johnson and Clinton administrations, respectively. 2.5%, 3.5% 4.5%. Under Clinton's presidency, unemployment dropped below 5 percent for the first time in 27 years. Yes, I know about Jimmy Carter, he left with 7.5%, the same percentage he came in with. Now look at unemployment on the last day of the Hoover, Eisenhower, Ford, Reagan, and BushI adminstrations. 25%, 6.5%, 7.5%, 5.5%, 7.5%. For Hoover, thats twenty five not two point five. Only Reagan left office with lower unemployment than he inherited, and his finishing unemployment rate pales beside that of Democratic administrations. Pitiful isn't it?"   [http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/showthread.php?id=71&pos=0&len=10]

For many more very interesting and informative graphs (many of them exclusive to this site) contrasting the records of the two major parties, see LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/graphs.html. See also http://JesusNoRepublican.Org/GOPcorruption.         It's hilarious to see Republicans trying to claim that their party was the more liberal party at the time of the passage of the landmark Civil Rights Bill of 1964.  See the the truth in contrast to their smokescreen at LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/civilrights.html         Although the positions of the Roman Catholic Church on abortion and gay rights get the most attention, overall, the Democrats in Congress have been favoring Catholic Church positions much more often than have Republicans, as is shown in these tables : Congress & the Catholic Church. For another whole site dedicated to the differences between the Democratic & Republican Parties, see www.damnedbigdifference.org/issues         The former Republican Governor of Delaware, Russ Peterson in his book, Patriots, Stand Up!, wrote, “Our cherished American way of life is under attack by the far right-wing Republicans who are now running the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives.  This is the product of a conspiracy that has been growing over the past few decades through the use of evil tactics and strategies, lies and deceptions to transform America. “Deception is now the hallmark of the Bush administration.  Read of the frightening chicanery in furthering an imperial strategy, nurturing the military-industrial complex, waging war on the environment, plunging the nation into debt, demeaning the needy, antagonizing the world and using terrorism to frighten and exploit.”  Peterson calls on patriots to apply the principles of democracy now to retake America from a conservative elite that controls the country.         Russ Peterson is a scientist, public servant, business executive, citizen activist, who has been an executive with the DuPont Co., Republican Governor of Delaware, assistant to Republican Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, head of the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality under Presidents Nixon and Ford, head of the Office of Technology Assessment, reporting to six Republican and six Democratic members of Congress, internationally acclaimed environmental leader, United Nations goodwill ambassador, and faculty member at Dartmouth College, Carleton College and the University of Wisconsin Madison.  His numerous national and international awards include 15 honorary doctorates.  In 1996 he became a Democrat. [ www.governorpeterson.org ] .         An example of the contrast between the parties regarding worker rights. For an especially biblical perspective, see the parable of "the Stolen Inheritance"

Presidential Vacationing compared
% of time on vacation: Truman = 7 % Carter = 5 % Clinton = 5 %	% of time on vacation: Eisenhower = 7.% Reagan = 11.5 % Bush Sr. = 37 % Bush Jr. = 21 %
[ excerpts from the sources below : ]         Of recent presidents, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton spent the most time working and the least time on vacation. Carter took only 79 days off during 4 years in office, which averages less than three weeks a year.         And Clinton spent 152 days on holiday over his 8 year term 2920 days).         Harry Truman spent 175 days in Key West, Fla., over seven years.         Today is the 342nd day he has spent at least some part of the day at his ranch, which means he's spent almost an entire year of his four and a half years in office at the ranch. That doesn't include time he's spent at his parents' place in Kennebunkport, Maine, or at Camp David.         If he stays at his Texas ranch until Sept. 3, as expected, the five-week stint away from the White House – the 49th vacation he's taken at the ranch – will surpass President Nixon's month long trip to Florida 36 years ago as the longest presidential retreat in the modern era.         George Bush Sr.  took all or part of 543 vacation days at Camp David and in Kennebunkport, out of his 4 year term, (1460 days).         Dwight Eisenhower spent 222 days of his 8 year presidency playing golf.         Ronald Reagan famously loved his vacations, spending all or part of 335 days during his eight-year presidency at his Santa Barbara, Calif., ranch.         Speaking of Eisenhower, check out the gall of the Republican Party platform the year that they ran Eisenhower as their standard-bearer:
Sources : (as of August, 2005:) http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/print?id=1070529 http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20031001.html http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0827-20.htm & (as of August, 2003:) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/08/21/politics/main34415.shtml .         For some outstanding stats on Presidential voter profiles see University of Michigan National Statistics & Bush, Clinton & Other administrations compared. George W Bush (R-TX) – $1,724,579 Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) – $574,794 Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) – $498,375 Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA) – $438,539 Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK) – $437,080 Sen. Kay Hutchison (R-TX) – $359,924 Sen. Mary Laudrieu (D-LA) – $343,755 Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) – $329,804 Rep. Donald Young (R-AK) – $319,0008 Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) – $299,682

Why should either party try to be more moral than the other if they are going to be painted as "just as immoral" as the other no matter what they do?!?         The problem isn't that "both parties do it", i.e. corruption, it's that most of the public (not to mention the media) is too damned lazy to study and think before they spout off such nonsense.        To give you an illustration, when Mondale was running against George W. H. Bush, Mondale told the publish the truth (that the country was in such a financial mess that as President he would have no choice but to raise taxes. Bush lied and promised "No New Taxes". 49 states then voted for the liar, and only Mondale's own state voted for the truth-teller.         And lying voters keep saying that they don't like corruption and dishonesty !!!         For about a couple of weeks in July, 2004 we posted a chart purporting to show among other things that the 25 states with the lowest IQ (which usually correlated with lowest average income as well), voted for Bush, with the lone exception of New Mexico, which Gore won by just a few votes.         However, as soon as we discovered that it was a hoax, which had fooled the prestigious "Economist" magazine as well as ourselves because it seemed so plausible, we removed it, because we don't want any unreliable or erroneous material weakening our case against Bush and conservative Republicans in general.  For the sake of curiosity, those who may want to know what we are talking about can find it at State_IQ_Income.html