What exactly have Liberals done for us?

[concept]

It cracks me up that the current crop of moonbats like to equate they are liberals in the traditional sense.

Hint: You're not even close.
You are a shrill, knob-gobbling minority that, unfortunately, has the control of the media which enables you to push your socialist agenda on the rest of us.

So please stop trying to pretend you have the same mentality of someone like JFK. He would be a republican today most likely, for sure he would be attacked on a daily basis by the same legions of kooks you sent after Palin or anyone else conservative.

Get with the program. The current crop of liberals would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

You aren't liberals, you're wayyyy past that now.

 

[rightwinger]

It cracks me up that the current crop of moonbats like to equate they are liberals in the traditional sense.

Hint: You're not even close.
You are a shrill, knob-gobbling minority that, unfortunately, has the control of the media which enables you to push your socialist agenda on the rest of us.

So please stop trying to pretend you have the same mentality of someone like JFK. He would be a republican today most likely, for sure he would be attacked on a daily basis by the same legions of kooks you sent after Palin or anyone else conservative.

Get with the program. The current crop of liberals would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

You aren't liberals, you're wayyyy past that now.

Yea....yea
Protecting the environment, rights of gays, healthcare for people who can't afford it...
JFK a member of THIS version of the republican party? Talk about delusional

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So in one thread you claim Thomas Jefferson and James Madison are liberals, but in this thread you say nullification is an evil conservative principle. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were the foremost proponents of nullification as evidenced by them authoring the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798.

 

[WillowTree]

They gave the US

Hatred.

Class Warfare

Racism

Divisiveness

Jeramiah Bullfrog and the US of KKKA

Code Pink


ACLU



Pelosi


Reid


and the obamalama..



and the deaths of roughly 40 million innocents.






yuck yuci! and barf.

 

[pal_of_poor]

I agree, liberals have done more for the masses, sometimes referred to by the rich as "the rabble."

But I suppose it depends on who "Us" is. Like the pronouns "we" and "our," "us" too, has to be held suspect, and it is always important to decide whether you are actually included within the pronoun.

It is the oldest of republican tricks, to use these three pronouns, trying to get you to believe you are a part of them (another one, along with "they"), part of the rich, the wealthy talking heads on FAUX, or Limbaugh, or other networks. In truth, most of us aren't included.

If Us is the American workers, the middle and lower classes, the liberals have done many things, to make us a better country. When true republicans use the word "us" they usually mean the top two percent wealthiest people in the nation, and they try to figure out some kind of con to get us to go along.

 

[pal_of_poor]

It cracks me up that the current crop of moonbats like to equate they are liberals in the traditional sense.

Hint: You're not even close.
You are a shrill, knob-gobbling minority that, unfortunately, has the control of the media which enables you to push your socialist agenda on the rest of us.

So please stop trying to pretend you have the same mentality of someone like JFK. He would be a republican today most likely, for sure he would be attacked on a daily basis by the same legions of kooks you sent after Palin or anyone else conservative.

Get with the program. The current crop of liberals would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

You aren't liberals, you're wayyyy past that now.

I think the truth is, the savage capitalista's are the ones pushing their radical agenda on the rest of us, because those who'd benefit from a bit more socialism is a huge group, much larger than your 2-3 percent "rest of us" you speak of. Capitalism is always the top few percent richest, shoving their radical agenda down the throats of the rest of us.

 

[bodecea]

It cracks me up that the current crop of moonbats like to equate they are liberals in the traditional sense.

Hint: You're not even close.
You are a shrill, knob-gobbling minority that, unfortunately, has the control of the media which enables you to push your socialist agenda on the rest of us.

So please stop trying to pretend you have the same mentality of someone like JFK. He would be a republican today most likely, for sure he would be attacked on a daily basis by the same legions of kooks you sent after Palin or anyone else conservative.

Get with the program. The current crop of liberals would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

You aren't liberals, you're wayyyy past that now.

Heck, today's Conservatives would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

And of course today's liberal is not the same as JFK's liberal...today's conservative is not the same as Goldwater's conservative. Nobody and no political stand remains static over the decades. Jeesh! To think that people have to explain that....

 

[midcan5]

Socialism is for the rich, capitalism for the rest of us.

The U.S. Economy Is Socialism for the Rich | | AlterNet

Christopher Brauchli: the Rich are Different

 

[NYcarbineer]

It cracks me up that the current crop of moonbats like to equate they are liberals in the traditional sense.

Hint: You're not even close.
You are a shrill, knob-gobbling minority that, unfortunately, has the control of the media which enables you to push your socialist agenda on the rest of us.

So please stop trying to pretend you have the same mentality of someone like JFK. He would be a republican today most likely, for sure he would be attacked on a daily basis by the same legions of kooks you sent after Palin or anyone else conservative.

Get with the program. The current crop of liberals would probably have been hung for treason by the founders.

You aren't liberals, you're wayyyy past that now.

Traditional liberalism?? That's a good one. The conservatives of JFK's time were still supporting segregation. I wouldn't be so quick if I were you to invoke the political values of left and right from the '50's.

 

[rightwinger]

The point is that conservatives have come down on the wrong side of history on every major initiative to help the American people.

Other than "tinkle down economics" what have they given us?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The point is that conservatives have come down on the wrong side of history on every major initiative to help the American people.

Other than "tinkle down economics" what have they given us?

I'm still curious how Thomas Jefferson and James Madison could be considered liberals when they supported nullification, which you attribute to conservatism.

You also stated:

"Declared – contrary to Jefferson’s dictum that “all men are created equal” – that “the black man has no rights the white man is bound to respect”. This was the holding of Dred Scott v. Sandford, perhaps the single worst opinion in the history of the US Supreme Court."

Jefferson himself was a slave owner, so is he really a poster child for equal rights as you seem to be implying?

 

[jillian]

Actually, they were radicals who overthrew a government.

This fantasy of the right that they were anything but is really funny.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm still curious how Thomas Jefferson and James Madison could be considered liberals when they supported nullification, which you attribute to conservatism.

You have to look at them within the context of their own era. Conservatives of the day supported the monarchy. The idea that royals are superior to the common man based on birthright. A strict class system was enforced by the conservatives of the day.
The concept that some poor dreg toiling in the field would have equal rights to a man born of royalty was decidedly liberal for its time.

Nulification is a non-issue. It relates more to a discussion of state rights vs federal government rights

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'm still curious how Thomas Jefferson and James Madison could be considered liberals when they supported nullification, which you attribute to conservatism.

You have to look at them within the context of their own era. Conservatives of the day supported the monarchy. The idea that royals are superior to the common man based on birthright. A strict class system was enforced by the conservatives of the day.
The concept that some poor dreg toiling in the field would have equal rights to a man born of royalty was decidedly liberal for its time.

Nulification is a non-issue. It relates more to a discussion of state rights vs federal government rights

I agree that Jefferson and Madison were liberals, and you're correct about the conservatives of the day as well. However, Jefferson and Madison are not liberals by todays definition at all. The fact that they were such great supporters of states' rights and nullification proves that, along with a belief in a strictly limited federal government.

 

[rightwinger]

I think you misrepresent liberals having a unique belief in a strong federal government. They believe in the role of the federal government to help the people where there is nobody else to fill that role.

Can you honestly tell me conservatives don't believe in a strong federal government? They just use the government for different purposes than the liberals do. If a liberal is in power, he uses the government for liberal purposes. If a conservative is in power, he uses the government for conservative purposes

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think you misrepresent liberals having a unique belief in a strong federal government. They believe in the role of the federal government to help the people where there is nobody else to fill that role.

Can you honestly tell me conservatives don't believe in a strong federal government? They just use the government for different purposes than the liberals do. If a liberal is in power, he uses the government for liberal purposes. If a conservative is in power, he uses the government for conservative purposes

I agree. Liberals believe in big government and conservatives believe in big government, just believe in slightly different roles for that government. That doesn't mean you can classify Jefferson or Madison as a liberal by todays definition, any more than you could classify them as conservatives.

 

[rightwinger]

I think you misrepresent liberals having a unique belief in a strong federal government. They believe in the role of the federal government to help the people where there is nobody else to fill that role.

Can you honestly tell me conservatives don't believe in a strong federal government? They just use the government for different purposes than the liberals do. If a liberal is in power, he uses the government for liberal purposes. If a conservative is in power, he uses the government for conservative purposes

I agree. Liberals believe in big government and conservatives believe in big government, just believe in slightly different roles for that government. That doesn't mean you can classify Jefferson or Madison as a liberal by todays definition, any more than you could classify them as conservatives.

It is improper to use todays values to classify historical figures as liberal or conservative. They were liberal within their own timeframe. That is why you can't look at slavery with Jefferson and Madison. They undoubtedly realized it was wrong. But it was the wrong period in history to tackle the slavery issue. They were still the liberals of their time

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think you misrepresent liberals having a unique belief in a strong federal government. They believe in the role of the federal government to help the people where there is nobody else to fill that role.

Can you honestly tell me conservatives don't believe in a strong federal government? They just use the government for different purposes than the liberals do. If a liberal is in power, he uses the government for liberal purposes. If a conservative is in power, he uses the government for conservative purposes

I agree. Liberals believe in big government and conservatives believe in big government, just believe in slightly different roles for that government. That doesn't mean you can classify Jefferson or Madison as a liberal by todays definition, any more than you could classify them as conservatives.

It is improper to use todays values to classify historical figures as liberal or conservative. They were liberal within their own timeframe. That is why you can't look at slavery with Jefferson and Madison. They undoubtedly realized it was wrong. But it was the wrong period in history to tackle the slavery issue. They were still the liberals of their time

Yes, but what you're clearly trying to do with this thread is equate liberals of their time with todays liberals, and that's simply incorrect. There is absolutely nothing in common with classical liberals and the progressive liberals of today.

 

[rightwinger]

I agree. Liberals believe in big government and conservatives believe in big government, just believe in slightly different roles for that government. That doesn't mean you can classify Jefferson or Madison as a liberal by todays definition, any more than you could classify them as conservatives.

It is improper to use todays values to classify historical figures as liberal or conservative. They were liberal within their own timeframe. That is why you can't look at slavery with Jefferson and Madison. They undoubtedly realized it was wrong. But it was the wrong period in history to tackle the slavery issue. They were still the liberals of their time

Yes, but what you're clearly trying to do with this thread is equate liberals of their time with todays liberals, and that's simply incorrect. There is absolutely nothing in common with classical liberals and the progressive liberals of today.

Thats not what I'm trying to do. I'm looking at the concept of liberalism vs the concept of conservatism. The issues that liberals attack change as we evolve
Conservativisms defense of the status quo has consistently put them on the wrong side of history

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It is improper to use todays values to classify historical figures as liberal or conservative. They were liberal within their own timeframe. That is why you can't look at slavery with Jefferson and Madison. They undoubtedly realized it was wrong. But it was the wrong period in history to tackle the slavery issue. They were still the liberals of their time

Yes, but what you're clearly trying to do with this thread is equate liberals of their time with todays liberals, and that's simply incorrect. There is absolutely nothing in common with classical liberals and the progressive liberals of today.

Thats not what I'm trying to do. I'm looking at the concept of liberalism vs the concept of conservatism. The issues that liberals attack change as we evolve
Conservativisms defense of the status quo has consistently put them on the wrong side of history

Yet you've attributed principles of liberals of the time with conservatism, such as nullification.