The more things change, (local newspaper article from 1864)
the more they stay the same...
was doing some research.. just for the heck of it.. .and came across the following small piece in one of my local newspapers entitled "The Rich Vs the Poor"
The Rich Vs. the Poor.
We have repeatedly stated that the legislation of the dominant party was aimed in favor of the rich and against the poor man, and that it was the aim of the administration to create a monied aristocracy here the same as exists in England. The New York Times in an article a few days since admits the truth of the charge. It says :
"The property of the wealthy should not be voted away by, or in anyway under the control of the laboring classes, and the right of suffrage should be regulated between the rich and according to their wealth."
We know of a good many mechanics and laborers who will resist manfully the proposition to deprive them of the rights secured to them by the Constitution. This doctrine "take care of the rich and the rich will take care of the poor," has been tried long enough in Europe and has proved an entire failure. Let the laborers of the country beware how they lend aid to any party to enslave them.
= new reply since forum marked as read
that the CIA overthrew those democratically elected governments. From the little I've read about it, in neither case were they mixed up with Soviet Communists. They were apparently doing what their populations elected them to do in the interest of creating a more equitable society (the kinds of things that Chavez later did in Venezuela).
Looking back at Republicans like Dulles, one can see where today's Republicans are coming from and why they hate and whenever possible attempt to subvert the will of The People.
Yes, the new boogeyman is "terrorism." 
