The ‘Democrat Party’

March 23, 2006

I’d always just assumed that Republicans call their rivals the “Democrat Party” as some kind of childish insult. They realize it’s grammatically wrong, but they think it annoys Dems, so, like a child who enjoys teasing others a little too much, they stick to it.

I’ve falsely assumed, however, that this is a fairly modern taunt. Kevin did some digging and found that it goes back quite a ways. For example, Geoffrey Nunberg explained:

The bleaching of democracy made small-d democrat irrelevant as a political label….That’s what allowed the Republicans of Hoover’s era to start referring to their opponents as the Democrat Party….By mid-century, “Democrat Party” had become the routine tic that it is for modern Republicans, though nowadays it probably has less to do with undermining the Democrats than simply irritating them.

For that matter, William Safire noted:

Acting on a tip, I wrote to the man who was campaign director of Wendell Willkie’s race against Franklin Delano Roosevelt. “In the Willkie campaign of 1940,” responded Harold Stassen, “I emphasized that the party controlled in large measure at that time by Hague in New Jersey, Pendergast in Missouri and Kelly Nash in Chicago should not be called a ‘Democratic Party.’ It should be called the ‘Democrat party.’ . . .”

Oddly, there doesn’t seem to be a Republican alternative for Dems to (mis)use. Andrew Sabl noted that Air America’s Sam Seder likes to pronounce Republican “RAYpublican,” but that doesn’t quite seem to work.

Andrew is right when he says Dems are neither “disciplined enough nor consistently petty enough to make anything like this stick,” even if they did come up with a sneering name for their rivals. But just out of curiosity, do readers have any ideas?

Of course, Re-puke-licans

  • Yikes – I wasn’t done with the post. I can’t take credit for that though; on this site and others have seen the term. Seems to be the best.

  • I think they are turning their actually party name into a slur good enough by themselves.

  • 2Manchu – silly! That’s the definition of a re-puke…

    Mike – like that. Mixture of Republican and supplicant. Of course, what they pray to, welll….

  • Republicanites. Makes them sound extreme. Usage would be a bit anti-intellectual, but it’s the kind of word that could actually be used on television without comment.

  • You may have noticed Mr. Bush referred to the “Democrat” party in his press conference on Monday when asked about the legality of his so called terrorist surveillance program. Elisabeth Bumiller’s coverage of the event corrected him, though. He was quoted in her story as saying “I did notice that nobody from the Democratic Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the terrorist surveillance program,” Mr. Bush said. He added, in a formulation similar to his campaign speeches portraying Democrats as soft on terrorism, that “they ought to stand up and say the tools we’re using to protect the American people shouldn’t be used.”

  • I think the flip side of this for liberals would to call all these people who think they’re conservative, “republicans”.

    This has been, by no means, a “conservative” administration – but they love to refer to themselves as such & way too many people oblige them by referring to them as “conservative.”

  • I think a good parallel for this “Democrat” usage is the use of “Jew” as a modifier–compare what’s conveyed by “Jew boy” versus “Jewish boy,” for example.

    Bush actually appears to demonstrate some awareness of the transgressive nature of this so-called tic, and (unlike most Republican politicians, it seems) tends to limit his use of it to partisan occasions. But he does slip up now and again, as in the press conference the other day.

    Granted, we should probably expect that our Senate Democrats, if pressed on the issue, will start to refer to themselves as “Democrat Senators,” so as not to reinforce the impression that the Party is weak on linguistics.

  • Call it for what it truly has become: Rovelican Party. (naw – that gives the jerk too much credit.)

    I like Catherine’s Republicanites.

  • Repub’can – dont’ give them the satisfaction of having the letters ‘l’ and ‘i’ in their party name just as they don’t give Democrats the satisfaction of having ‘i’ and ‘c’ in their party name. It’s about as childish as the reasoning behind why Republicans alter the Demoncratic party’s name.

  • How about “Republic Party?” It doesn’t make sense, but neither does “Democrat Party.”

  • Mike’s suggestion–“Republicants”–also has the ring of “replicants” from Philip K. Dick’s classic “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” and the film adaptation, “Bladerunner.”

    Like many of those who comprise the party of Bush, Cheney, DeLay, Rove, Dobson and Norquist, Dick’s replicants weren’t quite human, though they could sometimes pass as such.

  • Responding to M.A. comment #21:

    Because a Republic is “a political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.” Seeing that the US is basically a republic, this implies that the Republican party is meant to be in power.

  • * Correction * I just realized I wrote “DemoNcratic” in my above post (#20). My apologies. I’m sure Pat Robertson would love that one.

  • I’m sure the mutual backslapping is fun, but how about some real ideas?

    Goops or Gops (like saying “ahhh” at the doctor) would be my choice.

    Goops is funnier.

  • Short and sweet, those are the easiest to remember. Ed Sultz calls them righties, I like CONS.

    But a long list would include, Republican’ts, Rip Public Ends, Repugnants, Rimperialists, Retardicans.

    One that might work for widespread use, Republikers. the K for racial intolerance, also the similarity to german reminiscent of facism, and it really sounds condescending.

  • Republicons. Evoking both the numerous actual and impending criminal convictions of high profile GOPers, and their “con artist” approach to policy and general rhetoric.

  • I like Republicanites. Republicannanites has that Biblical tie-in. Republicants is good too – you’ve got the replicant/android tie-in. As an option we can toss in an apostrophe and make them the Republican’t Party.

    The ones I really wanna hear are “the accused” and/or “the defendants”.

  • I’ve pretty much stuck with “Fascist Rat Bastards!!” for the last 5 years. Usually, when used in context, it’s preceeded and followed by other epithets, and spoken loudly enough to wake the dog.

    I kind of like “Republicons” as a runner-up. For use in polite, mixed company, yes?

    -GFO

  • pub·li·can (pub?li-k?n) noun

    1. Chiefly British. The keeper of a public house or tavern.
    2. A collector of public taxes or tolls in the ancient Roman Empire.
    3. A collector of taxes or tribute from the public.

    Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.

  • I’ll have to go with RandyG above… however,

    From http://www.keyway.ca/htm2001/20011215.htm

    During Bible History, publicans were “freelance” tax collectors who operated in their own towns and districts, among their own people, for the occupying Roman government (see Ancient Empires – Rome). There were two classes of publicans, the “chief of the publicans” such as Zacchaeus (Luke 19:2), and the subordinate publicans who worked for them (Luke 5:27, 15:1, 18:10). As well as often being viewed as traitors, some of them were very corrupt, being little more than extortionists, and as such they were generally hated by the public.

    Sounds about like the rethug party, and it gives them a “tax collector” dig, AND it keeps with the religious theme they keep harping on.

  • For quite some time now, the Republicans have always loved to label their enemies—both real and imaginary—with terms that ends in “ist” or “ism.” Communists and Communism. Liberalists and Liberalism. Feminists and Feminism. Islamists and Islamism. Terrorists and Terrorism. All, by the way, early versions of Bush’s “straw-man” mentality.

    So…Why not just call these galoots “Repubicists,” and refer to the coerced, fraudulent appropriation of a nation by the overly-conservative, religious/economic/political elite as “Republicism?”

    Just think—Carl Rove is now reduced to being just another “ism….”

  • I’m hoping if all the Republican scandals finally sink deep enough into the American psyche that I can start using the phrase; “How Republican of you” to mean that they’ve done, or said, something dishonest.

    Analytical Liberal has pretty well captured the essence of the Republican Party, I’ll repeat it just to make myself feel good — Lying Fucking Bastards.

  • This is what happens when I am late for the party – Analytic Liberal (out of spite for beating me to my post, I’ll engage in the practice of depriving AL of the “al”) posted almost verbatim my thoughts. The term I use most of here is Rethugs, but my real preference remains L.F.B.

  • Oh, please, it’s not meant to irritate you. It’s simply that “democratic” is an adjective which actually has a meaning, and it’s a meaning many people don’t believe applies to the “Democratic” party. So they have to call you something else.

    Maybe if you stopped using the courts to circumvent the democratic process, you’d get your “ic” back….

  • That redress of grievances thing is sooo quaint. Just like the Geneva Convention and the Constitution.

  • Brett, the courts are there to protect our constitutional rights from republicanites who seem to have forgotten the first and fourth amendments.

    Don’t blame us for living by the laws of our nation.

  • I like, Republicanites. Perhaps Republic-ants or Republi-cants. Where I come from they are like dandelines on the lawn, always cropping up, need killing and known as Publicans but most often Publicraps to go along with what the dog does on the lawn.

  • From the article – Andrew Sabl noted that Air America’s Sam Seder likes to pronounce Republican “RAYpublican,” but that doesn’t quite seem to work.

    Actually, I believe Sam Seder pronounces it “RAPEpublican”.

    Personally, I pronounce it “LYING, THIEVING BASTARDS”.

  • “Brett, the courts are there to protect our constitutional rights from republicanites who seem to have forgotten the first and fourth amendments.”

    But not from Democrats who seem to have forgotten the 2nd, or the takings clause of the 5th, apparently. And who have an absolute abhorence for the 10th amendment’s rejection of unenumerated powers.

    Yes, you’re really just using the courts to uphold the Constitution! LOL

  • It’s a sound thing. When Repugs say it, “Democrat” has a nasty bleat at the end of it, a nasal whine, and it literally sounds like “crap”. “Democratic” just sounds nicer no matter how you say it.

    I call them “repugs” or “rethugs”. I think it’s more accurate.

  • I have to agree with the Dispassionate Liberal , call them what they are, Fascists.
    Or Nazis.

  • How about Republi-Conmen or Banana Republicans.
    They want to tear down the middle class social structures that Liberals have built in this country for sixty plus years. They want to make this a South American style banana republic.

    Also, GOP has to stand for Graft On Parade … it’s a natural.

  • Way back at the top of the list 2Manchu echoed my thoughts perfectly. Why give them the dignity of a cute euphemism? “assholes” pretty well captures it. However if creativity is required, Republisaurus kind of captures their…well…fossilized culture of death quite nicely.

    Now that said, I am not sure, but I will probably be the only anarchist posting to this thread and I am not a fan of government, heirarchies, politics or partisan anything. What we are faced with in this country…on this planet, in fact…is government by, of and for corporations. The assholes just happen to control most of them at this point in history. Whatever else you do to make the world a better place, please make time to do it with every ounce of love and energy and blood, sweat and tears that you have. I promise you that you won’t be sorry. No war but class war!

  • When I saw the challenge in the post I immediately thought “Republicons”, so hat tip to #32 🙂

    Otherwise, I prefer to call them ‘motherfu#%ing lying, no good, warmongering/profiteering sons of bitches.’ (apologies to all other sons of bitches out there)

    I don’t know… mine kind of rolls off the tongue. Doesn’t it?

  • “But not from Democrats who seem to have forgotten the 2nd, or the takings clause of the 5th, apparently.” – Brett

    Now don’t blame Democrats for the overreach on the takings clause. That was for the Republicanites business friends who want to steal land from poor home owners and set up high-rise condominiums.

    And you think a five day waiting period for hand guns is unreasonable when we lose more Americans each year to legally bought hand guns that are used in murders by their owners or another person living in the house with their owners? According to W.’s definition of his duties as President, that would give him absolute power to outlaw hand guns based on his Article II powers.

  • GOPper (n) is my own coined word for a piggish thug gorging himself at the corporate through – I know some blogger lifted my comment right off the yahoo group to which I belong. However, even if “borrowed” by that blogger I can prove I was the first to use it. I was not incensed but pleased that the word might enjoy some life among those who are as thoroughly and utterly disgusted as I am by this gopperous (adj. meaning greedy, unprincipled and amoral behaviour) administration and congress.

  • Better way in here.

    For short soundbites, I like Repugs.

    For a more focused attack, I will go with Mike up near the top, and say we really need to put the accent on the last bit:

    Republi – CAN’TS.

    They Can’t Govern, Can’t Lead, Can’t control spending, Can’t tell the truth….

  • The “Reds” with frequent use of “better dead than Red.”

    Though Republican’ts is terrific. With or without the apostrophe, it works.

  • Brett says: Maybe if you stopped using the courts to circumvent the democratic process, you’d get your “ic” back….

    Typical. Repugnicans have controlled the Senate for most of the last 10 years. They have nominated federal judges for 18 of the last 26 years. 7 of the 9 SC justices were appointed by Repugnicans. Yet somehow, it’s the Democratic party that’s “using the courts to circumvent the democratic process.” And rather than do the “democratic” thing like passing a constitutional ammendment to overturn Roe, the Repugs want to do it through the courts. I stand by my earlier suggestion: Lying Sacks of Brett Bellmore.

  • The use of the term Democrat Party as an insulting name for the Democratic Party may have its root from early in the 1900’s but, a high Republican official brought it back into vogue in the 1990’s. I’m almost positive it was Newt Gingrich, but it may have been Lee Atwater. The specific statement that I read was that the Democratic Party was actually run bu insiders and union bosses and wasn’t “democratic” at all. So, it was encouraged to call it the “Democrat” party as often as possible and hope that it would slide into general usage. For uneducated reporters, it has.

    Every time I hear it on the news or read it in the paper I contact the editor and ask them to correct their Style sheet. You should too.

    • Comments are closed.