Disgusted With Conservatism, America Was Born Liberal.

[Ropey]

Yes, liberal thinking is constantly changing. It used to be about individual liberties. Now it's about being subordinate to the government. The collective is more important than the individual.

Liberal Socialist ties?

Who'da thunk?

 

[daveman]

Yes, liberal thinking is constantly changing. It used to be about individual liberties. Now it's about being subordinate to the government. The collective is more important than the individual.

Liberal Socialist ties?

Who'da thunk?

Everybody, actually. It's just some people have an interest in keeping that hidden.

 

[AVG-JOE]

And to think that it only cost us tens of trillion of dollars.

Librulism, such a deal!!

What's 100 trillion dollars among 300 million people over 100 years?

It's an almost reasonable cost for social security and safety that's what it is!

Why is protecting me and my neighbors from The People of Yemen prioritized as a no limit expenditure and protecting me and my neighbors from DOW chemical and our own bad luck "not the responsibility of government"?

Liberalism. A great deal until they hand you the bill.

Do you live in Bhopal, India?

You and your neighbors should pay close attention to what goes on around you. If Soros is financing a chemical processing plant upstream from you, that's something YOU Need to get out in front of.

Ass-u-me it's a dry spell. A long one... couple of years.

Do you want to spend your days worried about water or admit that a maybe your neighbors aren't THAT bad after all, and maybe everybody pitching in for a community well would be easier than everyone digging their own?

Now that there's more than 107 of us living on this wet rock - and if our kids are ever going to reach for the stars - We, The People are going to need to learn how to use 'government' as a tool of the people instead of fear the very word as many seem to.

Social Security or something like it will be here in 991 years. I'll bet Y3K will also see simple banking and basic health insurance as public bureaucracies with creative banking and niche insurance both private and profitable.

There is as much a place in the world of the future for the spirit of self-preservation style capitalism as there is for a species-preservative government. Both are simply tools for evolution to use to carve a World from a random wet rock circling a common star.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/146106-shrink-the-rich-not-government-14.html#post3093122

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/72643-communism-socialism-or-capitalism-7.html#post1131310

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...n-three-times-start-a-poll-8.html#post3101333

 

[AVG-JOE]

And to think that it only cost us tens of trillion of dollars.

Librulism, such a deal!!

What's 100 trillion dollars among 300 million people over 100 years?

It's an almost reasonable cost for social security and safety that's what it is!

Why is protecting me and my neighbors from The People of Yemen prioritized as a no limit expenditure and protecting me and my neighbors from DOW chemical and our own bad luck "not the responsibility of government"?

$3333.33 a year per person. Since about half of adults do not pay federal income tax that doubles the bill to $6666.66 per year. Factor in that about half of that 300,000,000 are children and that doubles again. I bet that $13,333.33 per year out of your pocket sounds a lot more expensive than the rather vague figures you posted.

If you can find anyone to take that bet, do so. You'll win.

I never said I was a numbers guy... I'm a vision guy.


The point being that the only thing better than a retirement plan is a retirement plan administered by a bureaucracy that can't be sold to an oil sheik and is run by professional bureaucrats who won't see a dime more in their paycheck if they spend their workday looking for ways to not pay claims but will be rewarded for administering the rules of the programs correctly.

 

[mdn2000]

Ha, ha, ha, so many idiots, so many people who have not the slightest idea of the past in relation to the present.

To define what was through our times is idiocy. Our education, our history, our perspective of the past from our cultural view is difficult for the average man of intelligence, one cannot even comprehend how one lived in the 17th and 18th centuries let alone try and define who they are with our very limited knowledge of the past.

The meaning of words change from culture to culture, add 300 years of history to the equation and its pure stupidity to look at the past as if these people are a part of today.

Maybe my post is not as elegant and clear as I wish, I see others able to articulate things a bit better than I, so hopefully this will kick a few of you idiots in the ass so you can think a bit clearer of things.

Liberals of today cannot define conservatism, Liberals of today are too bigoted, idealogical, and just plain to uneducated.

Of course that is not true of all Liberals, many in the upper tier of Liberal power know exactly who they are, which is Marxist, the Marxist-Liberals remain empowered as long as the Liberal sheeple are bigots and ignorant.

 

[mdn2000]

The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt, the most LIBERAL constitution ever drafted.

No nation had ever dare allow their people permission to do the following.

1. To pray to whatever GOD they chose to worship
2. To speak out freely against the actions of their government
3. To armed themselves and form a militia to not only fight against foreign invaders, but their own government if necessary.

As long as the overall objective of our Constitution and Bill of Rights is to ensure our right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" the conservatives will have to deal with the many interpretations of what "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" means to each and every demographic in this country.

That means they must respect the rights of those whose lifestyles they don't agree with (WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE LAW OF COURSE).

Sorry conservatives, but you can't undo what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights had done. Food for thought.

In reality its Liberal judges that are undoing the constitution. I being a conservative am for keeping the Ten Commandments in a court house, Liberals demand the elimination of religion, at least Christianity.

Liberal Judges and the Liberal advocates forcefully remove prayer from High School football games, clearly against the Constitution.

How about "In God We Trust", who is trying to remove this from the dollar bill.

John Adams and the Jews

“I will insist the Hebrews have [contributed] more to civilize men than any other nation. If I was an atheist and believed in blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations ...

They are the most glorious nation that ever inhabited this Earth. The Romans and their empire were but a bubble in comparison to the Jews. They have given religion to three-quarters of the globe and have influenced the affairs of mankind more and more happily than any other nation, ancient or modern.”

- John Adams, Second President of the United States
(From a letter to F. A. Van der Kemp [Feb. 16, 1808] Pennsylvania Historical Society)

 

[007]

Fact of the matter is, by "today's" definition, "liberal" is a dirty word. They are truly a cancer on modern society. Liberal think is a mental illness.

 

[Intense]

Disgusted with conservatism, America was born liberal.

Amazing what one can learn from a history book... check out what it was to be 'liberal' in the worlds power base, Europe, during our first 75 years as a nation.

Sign me up...

1. GENERAL NATURE OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY LIBERALISM (19th century = 1800’s)

Liberalism is a difficult term to define. It has various shades and from time to time changes its complexion. During the nineteenth century, liberalism had developed into an ideology – a loose set of beliefs about the world and how it should be.

The roots of liberalism stretch back through the French Revolution and the Enlightenment to the seventeenth century political thoughts of John Locke and others. At the base of liberalism was a belief in individualism. Liberals optimistically believed that individuals, unaided and free from outside forces or institutions, should pursue their own interests. Individuals deserved equality before the law and the right to embark on careers open to talent. Government should be constitutional and based on popular sovereignty. The people should be represented by an elected legislature, to whom government ministers were responsible. Government should be limited in its powers, with individual freedoms as freedom of the press, of speech, and of assembly guaranteed. The role of government should be that of a passive police officer, enforcing laws and contracts. Government should interfere in economic life as little as possible, leaving that realm to private enterprise. Liberals were also anticlerical; that is, they opposed interference in government by organized religion. During the first half of the nineteenth century, liberals were usually nationalists, since nationalism at that time was primarily concerned with freeing peoples from alien rule and uniting them under one flag, and nationalism seemed consistent with popular sovereignty, constitutional government, and people’s rights. Liberals, particularly during the first half of the nineteenth century, were not democrats; liberals wanted to limit the right to vote to those holding wealth and the educated. Only later in the nineteenth century did liberals begin to favor universal male suffrage.

Liberals typically came from the middle class –the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, the professionals, and the intellectuals. Their chief opponents were the vested interests of traditional society – the aristocracy, the clergy, and the military – seeking to retain their favored positions. The peasantry was still generally conservative, strongly influenced by the clergy and sometimes by the aristocracy, and not very active in politics. Liberals were sometimes contemptuous of the propertyless masses below, forming alliances with them only so far as necessary. Middle-class liberals’ contempt for those below them was often a mask for fear; their contempt of the aristocrats above them was tinged with envy.

Liberals stood in contrast to conservatives. Liberals were optimistic about the individual; conservatives were pessimistic. Liberals had great faith in reason; conservatives argued that reason was too abstract. Liberals favored many of the ideas and reforms of the Enlightenment and French Revolution; conservatives attacked them. Liberals valued the individual over society; conservatives felt the individual was secondary. For liberals the state was an agent of the people; for conservatives the state was a growing organism not to be tampered with.

Their chief opponents were the vested interests of traditional society – the aristocracy, the clergy, and the military – seeking to retain their favored positions. The peasantry was still generally conservative, strongly influenced by the clergy and sometimes by the aristocracy, and not very active in politics.

The more things change, the more they remain, eh?

-Joe

Fail AVG-Joe. Liberalism today is Statist, Society's control over Individual Will. That is Totalitarian, everything Our Forefathers for the most part fought against. Modern Conservatism is Rooted in the Founding Principles. Modern Liberalism is in a Quest to Destroy the Founding Principles. Merry Christmas!

 

[AVG-JOE]

Ha, ha, ha, so many idiots, so many people who have not the slightest idea of the past in relation to the present.

To define what was through our times is idiocy. Our education, our history, our perspective of the past from our cultural view is difficult for the average man of intelligence, one cannot even comprehend how one lived in the 17th and 18th centuries let alone try and define who they are with our very limited knowledge of the past.

The meaning of words change from culture to culture, add 300 years of history to the equation and its pure stupidity to look at the past as if these people are a part of today.

Maybe my post is not as elegant and clear as I wish, I see others able to articulate things a bit better than I, so hopefully this will kick a few of you idiots in the ass so you can think a bit clearer of things.

Liberals of today cannot define conservatism, Liberals of today are too bigoted, idealogical, and just plain to uneducated.

Of course that is not true of all Liberals, many in the upper tier of Liberal power know exactly who they are, which is Marxist, the Marxist-Liberals remain empowered as long as the Liberal sheeple are bigots and ignorant.

So the smart move is to blow off history when it comes to the political labels so blithely tossed about and run like a kid with scissors carrying political terms as defined by a media and pop culture in headlines to sell papers and sound bytes to grab air time?



We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one, Bud.... History & Education

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0LmYEjXNIg[/ame]

 

[AVG-JOE]

Fact of the matter is, by "today's" definition, "liberal" is a dirty word. They are truly a cancer on modern society. Liberal think is a mental illness.

Ask yourself "Why?"

Consider what happens to the current flow of resources whenever historic "Liberal" thinking takes hold.....​

And follow the money.​

Who would want us arguing over this definition instead of discussing the fairness of the current tax code? Follow the money. Every time history needed Liberal Thinking it was the conservatives who fought for the status quo - meaning continue squelching competition, thank you very much!



Chumps. Every fucking one of us.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Disgusted with conservatism, America was born liberal.

Amazing what one can learn from a history book... check out what it was to be 'liberal' in the worlds power base, Europe, during our first 75 years as a nation.

Sign me up...

1. GENERAL NATURE OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY LIBERALISM (19th century = 1800’s)

Liberalism is a difficult term to define. It has various shades and from time to time changes its complexion. During the nineteenth century, liberalism had developed into an ideology – a loose set of beliefs about the world and how it should be.

The roots of liberalism stretch back through the French Revolution and the Enlightenment to the seventeenth century political thoughts of John Locke and others. At the base of liberalism was a belief in individualism. Liberals optimistically believed that individuals, unaided and free from outside forces or institutions, should pursue their own interests. Individuals deserved equality before the law and the right to embark on careers open to talent. Government should be constitutional and based on popular sovereignty. The people should be represented by an elected legislature, to whom government ministers were responsible. Government should be limited in its powers, with individual freedoms as freedom of the press, of speech, and of assembly guaranteed. The role of government should be that of a passive police officer, enforcing laws and contracts. Government should interfere in economic life as little as possible, leaving that realm to private enterprise. Liberals were also anticlerical; that is, they opposed interference in government by organized religion. During the first half of the nineteenth century, liberals were usually nationalists, since nationalism at that time was primarily concerned with freeing peoples from alien rule and uniting them under one flag, and nationalism seemed consistent with popular sovereignty, constitutional government, and people’s rights. Liberals, particularly during the first half of the nineteenth century, were not democrats; liberals wanted to limit the right to vote to those holding wealth and the educated. Only later in the nineteenth century did liberals begin to favor universal male suffrage.

Liberals typically came from the middle class –the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, the professionals, and the intellectuals. Their chief opponents were the vested interests of traditional society – the aristocracy, the clergy, and the military – seeking to retain their favored positions. The peasantry was still generally conservative, strongly influenced by the clergy and sometimes by the aristocracy, and not very active in politics. Liberals were sometimes contemptuous of the propertyless masses below, forming alliances with them only so far as necessary. Middle-class liberals’ contempt for those below them was often a mask for fear; their contempt of the aristocrats above them was tinged with envy.

Liberals stood in contrast to conservatives. Liberals were optimistic about the individual; conservatives were pessimistic. Liberals had great faith in reason; conservatives argued that reason was too abstract. Liberals favored many of the ideas and reforms of the Enlightenment and French Revolution; conservatives attacked them. Liberals valued the individual over society; conservatives felt the individual was secondary. For liberals the state was an agent of the people; for conservatives the state was a growing organism not to be tampered with.

Their chief opponents were the vested interests of traditional society – the aristocracy, the clergy, and the military – seeking to retain their favored positions. The peasantry was still generally conservative, strongly influenced by the clergy and sometimes by the aristocracy, and not very active in politics.

The more things change, the more they remain, eh?

-Joe

Fail AVG-Joe. Liberalism today is Statist, Society's control over Individual Will. That is Totalitarian, everything Our Forefathers for the most part fought against. Modern Conservatism is Rooted in the Founding Principles. Modern Liberalism is in a Quest to Destroy the Founding Principles. Merry Christmas!

So quit insulting liberals (as defined by history) and start calling 'Modern Liberals' what they truly are: "Democrats and Republicans".

Merry Christmas back at you!!

 

[mdn2000]

Ha, ha, ha, so many idiots, so many people who have not the slightest idea of the past in relation to the present.

To define what was through our times is idiocy. Our education, our history, our perspective of the past from our cultural view is difficult for the average man of intelligence, one cannot even comprehend how one lived in the 17th and 18th centuries let alone try and define who they are with our very limited knowledge of the past.

The meaning of words change from culture to culture, add 300 years of history to the equation and its pure stupidity to look at the past as if these people are a part of today.

Maybe my post is not as elegant and clear as I wish, I see others able to articulate things a bit better than I, so hopefully this will kick a few of you idiots in the ass so you can think a bit clearer of things.

Liberals of today cannot define conservatism, Liberals of today are too bigoted, idealogical, and just plain to uneducated.

Of course that is not true of all Liberals, many in the upper tier of Liberal power know exactly who they are, which is Marxist, the Marxist-Liberals remain empowered as long as the Liberal sheeple are bigots and ignorant.

So the smart move is to blow off history when it comes to the political labels so blithely tossed about and run like a kid with scissors carrying political terms as defined by a media and pop culture in headlines to sell papers and sound bytes to grab air time?



We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one, Bud.... History & Education

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0LmYEjXNIg[/ame]

I think what I said actually is what your saying, people are not able to disconnect themselves from the culture of today and see things as they were in the past. Liberals then not Liberals of today, as far as Republicans and Democrats being Liberal, you will not find me defending Republicans simply because I am Conservative. I dont see any real Conservative Republicans, they change colors to quickly.

I like history and spend much time reading from my own private library.