Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
For the most part, people pick the parts from each ideoleology that they think will benefit them personally the most. Everyone acts in their own rational self-interest.
I don't believe that this is true. 64% of Americans thought that the Bush cuts should be allowed to expire. 70% (plus) don't want to raise the debt ceiling, 76% see deficit spending as detrimental. If people endorse what benefits them personally, most wouldn't be voicing such concern over programs like these that do them.
and that is the difference between accounting and economics.For the most part, people pick the parts from each ideoleology that they think will benefit them personally the most. Everyone acts in their own rational self-interest.
I don't believe that this is true. 64% of Americans thought that the Bush cuts should be allowed to expire. 70% (plus) don't want to raise the debt ceiling, 76% see deficit spending as detrimental. If people endorse what benefits them personally, most wouldn't be voicing such concern over programs like these that do them.
It's absolutely true, and the first rule of economics. The people answered what they *THOUGHT* was in their own best interests. They're not always right.
Now mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean financial benefit; It's a deeper philosophy than that. Take mother Teresa, who dedicated her life to helping others. She was doing what made her feel good (Helping others) and avoiding what made her unhappy (abiding the suffering of others).
For the most part, people pick the parts from each ideoleology that they think will benefit them personally the most. Everyone acts in their own rational self-interest.
I don't believe that this is true. 64% of Americans thought that the Bush cuts should be allowed to expire. 70% (plus) don't want to raise the debt ceiling, 76% see deficit spending as detrimental. If people endorse what benefits them personally, most wouldn't be voicing such concern over programs like these that do them.
It's absolutely true, and the first rule of economics. The people answered what they *THOUGHT* was in their own best interests. They're not always right.
Now mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean financial benefit; It's a deeper philosophy than that. Take mother Teresa, who dedicated her life to helping others. She was doing what made her feel good (Helping others) and avoiding what made her unhappy (abiding the suffering of others).
If this were true, you wouldn't be a Democrat, as they are not liberal. Progressive, collectivist political philosophies are NOT liberal.
Did you get a copyright on the label "liberal"? If not, please allow others to define the word as they see fit.
You are funny. I just can't let Democrats steal the word. Liberal means liberty plain and simple. This is true though out the world. Democrats are NOT liberal!
So you believe that that gov should in no way be responsible for it citizens? Not even on the basic level like food or education?
I have never seen ANY evidence that it was the intent of the Founding Fathers for the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to be involved in ANY form of social engineering among the citizens of the United States of America.
I believe that it was their intent to leave those issues to the STATES and to the LOCAL governments, which is where it belongs. That way if one does not like the way it is done in their area they can relocate to another area where it is more to their liking.
I hold to a STRICT and UNBLEMISHED view of Article I, Section 8. If it isn't SPECIFICALLY in there, the US Congress should not be allowed to legislate or spend money on it. Period. Full Stop.
I am sure the SCOTUS is all over butt hurt that you feel some of their decisions have been in error. I know I am moved to tears myself.
When I start concerning myself with the viewpoints of others or their opinions about me and my beliefs; whether they be members of an online messageboard or Justices of the United States Supreme Court; it will be the day that I need to put myself out of my own misery, permanently.
Did you get a copyright on the label "liberal"? If not, please allow others to define the word as they see fit.
You are funny. I just can't let Democrats steal the word. Liberal means liberty plain and simple. This is true though out the world. Democrats are NOT liberal!
Alas, no, it is not.
You are funny. I just can't let Democrats steal the word. Liberal means liberty plain and simple. This is true though out the world. Democrats are NOT liberal!
Alas, no, it is not.
Perhaps your are right. Maybe the word lib-er-al was not derived from lib-er-ty. Maybe, it was derived from lib-er-ty-bell. Do ya think?
Liberty
The Latin words "Liber," "Libera," and "Liberum" -- with a Long I -- came from the root meaning, "to pour." From this, we get the word "Liberty" (hence pronounced with a short I), from the freedom we feel when we get drunk. See Library (unrelated).
Alas, no, it is not.
Perhaps your are right. Maybe the word lib-er-al was not derived from lib-er-ty. Maybe, it was derived from lib-er-ty-bell. Do ya think?
I actually really enjoy discussing language, Sail Away. I dun happen to know the origin of the word "liberty", so I looked it up.
Liberty
The Latin words "Liber," "Libera," and "Liberum" -- with a Long I -- came from the root meaning, "to pour." From this, we get the word "Liberty" (hence pronounced with a short I), from the freedom we feel when we get drunk. See Library (unrelated).
Etymologically Speaking...
Alas, no, it is not.
Perhaps your are right. Maybe the word lib-er-al was not derived from lib-er-ty. Maybe, it was derived from lib-er-ty-bell. Do ya think?
I actually really enjoy discussing language, Sail Away. I dun happen to know the origin of the word "liberty", so I looked it up.
Liberty
The Latin words "Liber," "Libera," and "Liberum" -- with a Long I -- came from the root meaning, "to pour." From this, we get the word "Liberty" (hence pronounced with a short I), from the freedom we feel when we get drunk. See Library (unrelated).
Etymologically Speaking...
Perhaps your are right. Maybe the word lib-er-al was not derived from lib-er-ty. Maybe, it was derived from lib-er-ty-bell. Do ya think?
I actually really enjoy discussing language, Sail Away. I dun happen to know the origin of the word "liberty", so I looked it up.
Liberty
The Latin words "Liber," "Libera," and "Liberum" -- with a Long I -- came from the root meaning, "to pour." From this, we get the word "Liberty" (hence pronounced with a short I), from the freedom we feel when we get drunk. See Library (unrelated).
Etymologically Speaking...
So does that mean since I don't drink, I will never have liberty?
Perhaps your are right. Maybe the word lib-er-al was not derived from lib-er-ty. Maybe, it was derived from lib-er-ty-bell. Do ya think?
I actually really enjoy discussing language, Sail Away. I dun happen to know the origin of the word "liberty", so I looked it up.
Liberty
The Latin words "Liber," "Libera," and "Liberum" -- with a Long I -- came from the root meaning, "to pour." From this, we get the word "Liberty" (hence pronounced with a short I), from the freedom we feel when we get drunk. See Library (unrelated).
Etymologically Speaking...
Why you be mean to me? I be not mean to you!
1
: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice
2
a : a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant : privilege b : permission especially to go freely within specified limits
3
: an action going beyond normal limits: as a : a breach of etiquette or propriety : familiarity b : risk, chance <took foolish liberties with his health> c : a violation of rules or a deviation from standard practice d : a distortion of fact
4
: a short authorized absence from naval duty usually for less than 48 hours
I like #4. I assume it refers to belly button cleaning.
liberal (adj.)
late 14c., from O.Fr. liberal "befitting free men, noble, generous," from L. liberalis "noble, generous," lit. "pertaining to a free man," from liber "free," from PIE base *leudheros (cf. Gk. eleutheros "free"), probably originally "belonging to the people" (though the precise semantic development is obscure), from *leudho- "people" (cf. O.C.S. ljudu, Lith. liaudis, O.E. leod, Ger. Leute "nation, people"). Earliest reference in English is to the liberal arts. Sense of "free in bestowing" is from late 14c. With a meaning "free from restraint in speech or action" (late 15c.) liberal was used 16c.-17c. as a term of reproach. It revived in a positive sense in the Enlightenment, with a meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant," which emerged 1776-88. Purely in reference to political opinion, "tending in favor of freedom and democracy" it dates from c.1801, from Fr. libéral, originally applied in English by its opponents (often in French form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness) to the party favorable to individual political freedoms. But also (especially in U.S. politics) tending to mean "favorable to government action to effect social change," which seems at times to draw more from the religious sense of "free from prejudice in favor of traditional opinions and established institutions" (and thus open to new ideas and plans of reform), which dates from 1823.
Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, "Devil's Dictionary," 1911]
The noun meaning "member of the Liberal party of Great Britain" is from 1820.
I dun write the dictionary, Avatar. I just use it.
LOL!
So basically what you're saying is that most Americans don't really have a set of morals, standards, values, and ideals that they believe in. That I will most definitely agree with.
As both a Fiscal and a Social Conservative of the extreme type, that disgusts me to the point of nausea, but it doesn't surprise me.
By all means, Anachronism. Extreme narcissism or death, I always say.
So you don't want people to be free to live as they please as long as they don't violate the rights of anyone else. And you don't want the government to be prudent in its spending of our money.
Got it.
By all means, Anachronism. Extreme narcissism or death, I always say.
Better DEAD than RED, young lady. But I don't expect a woman to understand such things. Now go back to your Barbie Dolls and EZ Bake Oven and let the BOYS worry about the World Outside.
So you don't want people to be free to live as they please as long as they don't violate the rights of anyone else. And you don't want the government to be prudent in its spending of our money.
Got it.
NO.
I have no interest in unfettered Freedom at all. I believe that only those who have proven an ability to live their lives within the approriate moral and values limits should even have the opportunity for "Freedom". The vast super-majoirty of Americans, and pretty much all foreigners do not fall into that category.
I don't want the Federal Government spending much money at all on anything other than Homeland Defense, the Military, and a few other very basic things.
Ah, a 12 year old troll.
I hope your mommy catches on to you soon, buster....and sees this post.
So anyone who you in all your infinite wisdom deem to be immoral should not enjoy the same freedoms you do?
Ah, a 12 year old troll.
I hope your mommy catches on to you soon, buster....and sees this post.
LOL. I'll be 37 in July, thank you very much. As for my mother.... she would AGREE with my commentary. Then again she's a pastor's daughter and has never in her 65 years really been all that interested in politics or anything of that sort.
So anyone who you in all your infinite wisdom deem to be immoral should not enjoy the same freedoms you do?
You got it. I have never believed in a "Right" to act in an Immoral manner.
What if people find you immoral?
The only morality we should observe is that we violate the rights of no other individual long as that one moral tenet is held that will be enough.
