The Paradox of Liberalism...... (A bit long, but worth it)

[LeoLady]

What our founding fathers established in the late 18th century was considered very liberal — giving people freedom to determine and pursue their own goals, uninhibited and unaided by the government.

From their own experience, they knew that the more the people demanded from government, the more the government would have to control the people. They learned from monarchies and feudal systems that kept people in poverty in order to make those people rely on the pittance that the kingdom supplied just to keep them alive and working for the monarchy.

The so-called “liberal” ideas our founding fathers proposed — ideas like unrestricted free trade, small government, and political and economic freedom for its citizens — are the foundation on which the U.S. was created. Those ideas are the very reasons the U.S. has gone from fledgling country to dominant world power in 200 short years.

http://www.thefreedomfactory.us/articles/news/ideas/

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I like revisionist history and fairy tales. And I especially love moonbatty dissertations filled with straw man arguments. who are you talking to...yourself? what credible group is advocating commie socialist crap in America? WTF do you live?

I'll tune in later tomorrow.

 

[Modbert]

What really would sum up your post:

Liberals:

Government = More

Government involved outside economy/health wise = Less

Conservatives:

Government = Less

Government involved outside economy/health wise = More

Problem with your post is that Wall Street, Medicine companies, etc have shown us that they need regulation. Otherwise they will rob us blind/kill us slowly with whatever they are feeding us.

Regulation is needed in some form, that is what the Bush Administration failed to realize.

The $800 billion bailout was a horrible idea. Why? Not only because these companies needed bailouts. But because this $800 billion bailout was unregulated, the companies that got this money were still unregulated, etc. It's like trying to fill a never ending hole. You can toss in as much as you like, but nothing will be solved unless the hole is not never ending.

In fact, no Regulation was a huge reason why these companies ended up needing bailouts.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

look at your signature quotes:

You always write it's bombing, bombing, bombing. It's not bombing, it's air support." - -- Air Force Colonel David Opfer, complaining to reporters about their coverage of the Vietnam War.

------ hahahahahaha ----- euphemism have a meaning to you?


"Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." - President Ronald Reagan


----so Ronald Reagan expanded the government----hahahahahaha

"You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one." - Rush Limbaugh, 17 Aug 1993


------a drug addled blowhard?---------



Hey clueless, where do you live, Seattle? buy some Prozac.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What really would sum up your post:

Liberals:

Government = More

Government involved outside economy/health wise = Less

Conservatives:

Government = Less

Government involved outside economy/health wise = More

the article uses canned rhetoric, quaint phraseology and ideological lingo. It's like listening to one of the old commies (only we're in the looking glass world where everything is upside down) in Harvard Square back in the days of the cold war.

gawd, people are stupid.

 

[LeoLady]

"who are you talking to...yourself?"

..... actually I just posted an article that I found interesting.... is reading comprehension an issue with you?

"what credible group is advocating commie socialist crap in America?"

.... now that just makes no sense at all........... wanna clarify?

"WTF do you live? "

.... why?.... are you a stalker?..... you do realize there are laws that you should probably familiarize yourself with.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I like revisionist history and fairy tales. And I especially love moonbatty dissertations filled with straw man arguments. who are you talking to...yourself? what credible group is advocating commie socialist crap in America? WTF do you live?

I'll tune in later tomorrow.

ROFL... She wil be back, but she won't mention what specific elements of the OP may represent a straw man... no will she get around to telling us what elements comprise the revision of history and or fairly tales...

But Leftists prefer these flaccid broadcast denials... saves all that 'THINKIN''

As to the query... "what credible group is advocating commie socialist crap in America?"

Any group which advocates for left-think does so absent a scintilla of credibility... one can't advocate for left-think and possess credibility, as left-think is OKA: Absurdity...

But groups that are advocating for left-think (Socialism) are represented by The Democrat Party... the Black Congressional Caucus, NAACP,Communist Party USA, Socialist Party USA, The Hussein Administration, The Majority Leadership of the US House of Representative, the Majority Leadership of the Senate... Moveon.org, The Daily KOS, The Democrat Underground, DispAir America... The New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Miami Hearald, Detriot Free Press, Dallas Morning News, San Fran Chronicle... ABC News, NBC News, CBS News, CNN, CNN HLN, MSNBC just to name a few...

 

[midcan5]

What our founding fathers established in the late 18th century was considered very liberal — giving people freedom to determine and pursue their own goals, uninhibited and unaided by the government.

The first sentence tells you where you are going. That is a good thing because then you do not have to waste time reading the rest of this social darwinist nonsense. The founding fathers established a 'government' that would support freedom through a system of checks and balances. Those balances include an attempt at a level playing field for all people. And part of those checks is the rights of Americans to have a part of the pie. The pie is created by the system and not by the social darwinists who mostly through birth and privilege start out in front. And there is nothing wrong with starting in front so long as the rest have opportunity. This conservative mantra on government is old now and has failed, time to move on.....


"The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts."

Quote DB :: Speeches :: George Washington :: George Washington's Farewell Address Speech

 

[jillian]

Leolady,

In the future, please post only a section of your article and provide a link. I did it for you this time.

Thanks.

 

[editec]

What our founding fathers established in the late 18th century was considered very liberal — giving people freedom to determine and pursue their own goals, uninhibited and unaided by the government.

Yes, the flight from monarchism to any form of representational government was an example of radical liberalism.​

From their own experience, they knew that the more the people demanded from government, the more the government would have to control the people.

They knew nothing of the sort.​

They learned from monarchies and feudal systems that kept people in poverty in order to make those people rely on the pittance that the kingdom supplied just to keep them alive and working for the monarchy.

They knew that totalitarianism is a bad form of government, that's for damned sure.​

The so-called “liberal” ideas our founding fathers proposed — ideas like unrestricted free trade,

Total revisionist bullshit. The first thing the founding fathers did was imposed TARIFFS​

small government, and political and economic freedom for its citizens — are the foundation on which the U.S. was created.​

Except for Slaves, women, and people without property. More right right mythology here, folks.​

Those ideas are the very reasons the U.S. has gone from fledgling country to dominant world power in 200 short years.

A Nonsensical appeal to patriotism which has zero meaning​

Those ideas are the reason many consider the U.S. to be the best damn country in the world.

Only if they especially stupid enough to think what has been proposed thus far has any relationship to reality....which it doesn't.​

But with freedom comes risk. In a free society, you are in the driver’s seat of your life. You create your own circumstances, and whether that’s rags or riches, you are ultimately responsible for yourself.

REally? Then why bother having a government at all? Moron ALERT!​

No one else is.​

Contrast that with a communist or socialist state like the former USSR, or China or Cuba. In a socialist state:

• You are guaranteed a job (although you have no say in what that job is)
• You are guaranteed a paycheck (although government takes 75% automatically for taxes)
• You are guaranteed food to eat (although it’s never fresh and may be rationed at any time)
• You are guaranteed a roof over your head (although you’ll be sharing it with 6 other families)

Yeah...right.​

Every good myth deserves to be compared to another equally simplistic and stupid collection of myths.. That's what really stupid people seem to think passes as intellectualy discourse, I suppose​

Socialism allows you to “outsource responsibility” in your life to the government.

Socialism is the collectivization of the means of production.​

Sounds nice, until you consider the consequences.

Typical...start out with as specious presupposition, then spin blther by the bale based on it.​

Yes, you will be able to eat and provide a roof over your head, but you will never have a chance to progress in life because Uncle Sam will take away nearly everything you earn to pay for the next guy’s medical/housing/retirement. You will be at the mercy of the government, who may or may not be interested in you in your time of need. You will have no control over your own life.

Wah wah! wah! I might have to pay taxes! Fucking idiot.​

​

This leads to the paradox of modern-day liberal philosophy. Liberals claim to seek freedom from government controls over social issues in their lives:​

• Less interference in our personal lives — “Don’t tread on me!”
• Less restrictions on abortion — “We want the right to choose [life or death for our unborn children]“
• Less restrictions on marriage — “We want gay marriage”
• Less restrictions on drugs — “We want marijuana legalized”

​

Liberalism believes that the government should interfer only in situations where failing to do so causes harm to the commomweal, dipshit.​

At the same time, they are asking the same government that imposes “shackles” on their personal lives to provide them with unlimited services:​

• More control of the medical system — “We want free health care”

Something must be done.​

• More control over jobs and wages — “We want a high minimum wage and salary caps for the rich”

Salary caps on the rich? Nonsense...truly progressive taxation makes sense though...we ought to try it.

• More control over retirement — “We want Social Security”

A system that works well as long as the society is a going concern.

• More control over landlords and housing — “We want rent control”

No liberal I know is demanding rent control.

• More social safety nets — “We want welfare for the poor”

Yes, we do. Help people get out of poverty or pay the much higher price of poverty's outcomes.

• More control over education — “We want better public education”

God damned right we do. You don't? Idiot.

• More control over the environment — “We want a green society”

And you don't? Idiot

How can the same group of people that so distrusts our government ask that same government to provide cradle-to-grave care?

The same way the people who claim they love freedom suck the dick of the most fasistic social system in a free society...the military.​

Like the conservatives, liberals understand that some pure freedom (like not having a military) isn't possible if one wants to have a nation.​

Don’t they know the consequences of asking for everything from the government? Have they studied history?

Yes we have. Which is why you discover that most historians are accused of being liberals by those morons who haven't really studied history, but who like to call self delusiding myths like this author believes are history​

Have they considered other countries that have gone down this dangerous path? The party that seeks these programs needs — requires — people to be in poverty in order to control them!

A lot of words....no content​

When I was 16, I got my first car and demanded my freedom from my parents. I argued against a curfew and scoffed when my folks told me who I could or could not hang out with. But out of the same breath, I expected for them to feed me and provide a place to live rent-free. I fully expected them to pay my bills while I ran around being a carefree teenager.
These days I laugh about how immature I was back then. But it’s not so funny when 50% of our country — grown men and women — behave the same way toward the government!​

Yawn​

True liberalism is freedom from the shackles of a “nanny-state” government that controls who can progress to wealth or who can start/run a business or travel freely through the country. As stated before, our founding fathers were very liberal in their time. But oh, how the world has changed…

You wouldn't know true liberalism if it has given you and you family decent life for generation...which it did, you ungrateful idiot.​

The modern Democratic party has hijacked the liberalism of our government and taken it to an extreme where current social trends and collectivist views define the party platform.​

The Democratic party is no more liberal than the current Republican party is conservative. Only an idiot can't understand that.​

They’re fighting in the name of “the common good” to enact the same socialist policies our founding fathers worked so hard to prevent.

Bullshit​

Serious academic debate about the economics of socialism ended nearly 100 years ago. How many times are we going to try to make socialism work before we realize it can’t?

How many times are you going to have to have socialism explained to you before you can understand what it is?​

You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Either you want more government (regulation, interference, control) or less government (freedom, privatization, risk).
Make up your minds, people. There is no in-between.​

Hobsian nonsense...typical of idiots who know no history and who don't understand dick about political science, either.​

 

[Red Dawn]

What our founding fathers established in the late 18th century was considered very liberal — giving people freedom to determine and pursue their own goals, uninhibited and unaided by the government.....

The so-called “liberal” ideas our founding fathers proposed — ideas like unrestricted free trade, small government, and political and economic freedom for its citizens — are the foundation on which the U.S. was created.

HaHa! This is so fucking awesome! After spending two decades trying to demonize the word "liberal", Bush supporters are so embarrased of being associated with rightwingism, they're trying to reclaim the word "liberal" for themselves.

Fucking hilarious.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

What our founding fathers established in the late 18th century was considered very liberal — giving people freedom to determine and pursue their own goals, uninhibited and unaided by the government.

... This conservative mantra on government is old now and has failed, time to move on.....


"The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts."

Quote DB :: Speeches :: George Washington :: George Washington's Farewell Address Speech

ROFLMNAO... There is just no scale which can meansure the hilarity wherein a leftist declares the principles on which the US Constitution rests to be DEAD! and cites the words of GW in support of that erroneous conjecture; this is analogous to declaring gravity to be dead and citing Darwins relevant observations regarding the falling apple as evidence.

It's the old "Make a ludicrous statment about America and cite a founder, so that it appears that the founder agreed." tactic... and as long as no one actually reads the quote and understands the CONTEXT in which the statement was made... it works GREAT!

The simple fact is that Midcan has advanced a quote which in NO WAY supports the essence festering within her ludicrous conjecture. Basically the left wants to use the idea of checks and balances inherent in the US system of governance; balances where oppossing points of view are moderated as a result of the pressure derived from the inherent conflict of our system, as an excuse to advocate for policy designed to destroy our system. The idea is that the founders ddesigned the system so that policy advocating for cultural suicide is always in opposition to life, so the founders demanded that suicidal policy always be represented to contest those in US government advocating for survival; 'Here SEE! George Washington said so!'

The good news is that this foolishness is easily refuted; King George had a point of view and he certainly had MANY people who adhered to his point of view... But GW was not saying in this speech that the point of view of King George should be represented in our government where his goal of destroying our government, our national sovereignty and strip us of the protections we enjoy limiting the power of government, preventing the King Georges of the world from usurping our means to exercise our God given, inalienable human rights... and despite Midcan's erroneous position that the ideological left is NOT representative of ideas that stand wholly antithetical to the preservation of INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS; IDEAS ON WHICH THE UNITED STATES WAS FOUNDED AND IDEAS WHICH ARE IMMUTABLE IN THE THE EXISTANCE OF THE UNITED STATES... the left is designed for no other purpose than to strip the human race of any understanding OF INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS and to replace that truth with the lies inherent in 'collective rights.'

ROFL... But hey, that's evil for ya...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

... Problem with your post is that Wall Street, Medicine companies, etc have shown us that they need regulation. Otherwise they will rob us blind/kill us slowly with whatever they are feeding us.

LOL... No one has advanced ANY idea wherein our common law does not harshly punish those that infringe upon and or usurp the means to exercise our inalienable rights... as you're suggesting. Where we differ is in the accountability to that law is eclipsed by government. FOR INSTANCE:

Regulation is needed in some form, that is what the Bush Administration failed to realize.

Where exactly did the Bush administration fail to sufficiently regulate the respective business interests behind the financial meltdown? Was it manifested in the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddy MAC and the mortgage industry which was encouraged to feed that regulatory failure? Your answer, to be coherent with your above point MUST BE: yes.

The problem is that the Buish administration REPEATEDLY CALLED FOR SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES IN THE OVERSIGHT OF THESE LEFTIST ORGANS... oversight WHICH THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT REJECTED, TIME AND TIME AGAIN... incontestably illustrated in the reaction by Bawney Fwank, Maxine waters, John Conyers, etc... LEFTISTS ALL... who demanded that Bush's attempt to bring these leftist organs into compliance with reason was a witch hunt; an attempt by Bush to keep the poor from owning their own homes and to protect the interests of that most vile of all creatures... "THE RICH!"

The $800 billion bailout was a horrible idea. Why?

Because it is rooted in the absence of reason; it rejects the essential accountability founded in nature and as such, is illustrative of left-think; thus stands antithetical to the common good of INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY and the inherent responsibilities on which our inalienable rights rest.

Not only because these companies needed bailouts. But because this $800 billion bailout was unregulated, the companies that got this money were still unregulated, etc. It's like trying to fill a never ending hole. You can toss in as much as you like, but nothing will be solved unless the hole is not never ending.

WRONG... You're merely advocating FOR the bailout; FOR the unprincipled rejection of accountability and on the basis that 'the bailout is fine, if the money goes to those who really need it...' Such a position mirrors the reasoning of those who sponsored the bailout... those who you hope to protect from being responsible for such, by projecting the responsibility for the bailout onto GW Bush, who regrettably signed it, bt did so on the advise of Keynesian left-thinkers who demanded that if the natural order of accountability were allowed to come to fruition, the pain would be too great and all would be lost. Bush is a Republican; you want to thus attribute his bailout policy as being Republican Policy, thus CONSERVATIVE POLICY and it is most decidedly NOT. The bailout is LEFTIST POLICY, through and through and this will always be the case without regard to HOW MANY people you convince otherwise.

In fact, no Regulation was a huge reason why these companies ended up needing bailouts.

False... Policy foisted upon those companies by leftists in the Federal legislature; policy which ran counter to the immutable principles of nature; policy which PROMISED THOSE COMPANIES THAT THE GOVERMENT WOULD GUARRANTEE THEIR LOSSES... is what required the bailout; a bailout which was made CERTAIN the INSTANT THE GOVERNMENT GUARRANTEED THAT ANY LOSSES WOULD BE REFUNDED.

You see sis, the free market operates upon RISK! Mortgages are a vehicle wherein the inherent RISKS are managed through actuarial processes and calculations the are designed to accurately REFLECT, thus PREDICT the exposure to RISK which the lender is exposed... The LEFTISTS IN GOVERNMENT IN EFFECT SAID: 'MAKE THESE LOANS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE SEEMS RISKY AND WE PROMISE TO PAY YOU BACK FOR ANY LOSSES YOU SUSTAIN AS A RESULT OF MAKING THEM.'

Well guess what Skippy... the bailout in effect is the government paying off on that guarantee... A guarantee which was FOOLISH BEYOND MEASURE AS IT WAS A GUARANTEE AGAINST LOSSESS WHICH WERE AN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY!

MORONS!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

great thread...can we get a few more moonbats in here so you can have a quorum?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Leolady,

In the future, please post only a section of your article and provide a link. I did it for you this time.

Thanks.

save yourself ... fleeeeeee!

there is nothing here but quaint lingo and stilted phrases passing itself off as a discussion of facts. sometimes they'll ask a question and then answer their own question and then congratulate themselves in front of an imaginary crowd all while using the dreaded "WE" tactic.

the moonbats' parasitic mind fuks are contagious...flee for your life.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

great thread...can we get a few more moonbats in here so you can have a quorum?

Great default concession highlighting the inherent deficiencies in your soon to be discredited position! That's of course based upon the presumption that you've the courage to post a position... I've found that the left-thinkers prefer to keep their rants held closely to the vest, as to expose them is to see them destroyed... and who needs that, Right?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

great thread...can we get a few more moonbats in here so you can have a quorum?

Great default concession highlighting the inherent deficiencies in your soon to be discredited position! That's of course based upon the presumption that you've the courage to post a position... I've found that the left-thinkers prefer to keep their rants held closely to the vest, as to expose them is to see them destroyed... and who needs that, Right?

there is NO position you fukin' dolt. there is NO audience waiting on your every word...the word you borrowed from some dusty, old, cold war treatise on leftists and commies and lions and tigers and bears....oh my!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Leolady,

In the future, please post only a section of your article and provide a link. I did it for you this time.

Thanks.

... there is nothing here but quaint lingo and stilted phrases passing itself off as a discussion of facts.

Isn't it cool how the left is just CERTAIN that what they hold as "FACT" is the full breadth and scope of relevance? When in truth, their 'FACTS' serve as little more than a means to distract FROM relevance...

ROFL... Leftists..


sometimes they'll ask a question and then answer their own question and then congratulate themselves in front of an imaginary crowd all while using the dreaded "WE" tactic.

the moonbats' parasitic mind fuks are contagious...flee for your life.

LOL... CLASSIC!

To quote a great American artist... "RUN FORREST... RUUuuuuuuunnnnnn!"

HYSTERICAL!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

hey Pubicintherectium, just wanted you to know the banks have opened and need to do something that cannot be done online. So now when you talk to yourself there will be no monitor.

have at IT.


you're free. free as a bird... a dodo bird. yahooooooo!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

great thread...can we get a few more moonbats in here so you can have a quorum?

Great default concession highlighting the inherent deficiencies in your soon to be discredited position! That's of course based upon the presumption that you've the courage to post a position... I've found that the left-thinkers prefer to keep their rants held closely to the vest, as to expose them is to see them destroyed... and who needs that, Right?

there is NO position you fukin' dolt.

ROFLMNAO... now when I say that I know these people like the back of my ample hand and doubt climbs over you... recall this wonderful example wherein the habitual tendencies of the red faced left-thinker was pre-stated and summarily reflected in their VERY NEXT MOVE...

Uh... Dull-null, THAT was the point DUMBASS... that YOU SOUGHT TO INTERJECT YOURSELF INTO THE DISCUSSION, SANS a relevant, lucid, intellectually sound, logically valid POINT... You'd like to post such, you simply know that were you to TRY, that 'try' is as close as you'd get... Your impotence is a function of your having 'tried' so many times, only to see your efforts crushed, that you've now relegated yourself to these flaccid little drive-by spewings which present little beyond implication and projection, despite their chronic reference to some ethereal 'FACT(s)'

Allow a deomonstration:

there is NO audience waiting on your every word...the word you borrowed from some dusty, old, cold war treatise on leftists and commies and lions and tigers and bears....oh my!

Notice how that statement in no way reflects ANYTHING which stands at issue in this thread... it is conjecture of the baseless variety, projected as fact, despite the stark absence of lucidity, cogency or again, even simple relevance...

HOWEVER!! Should you work up the courage to advance something along those lines... bring your troll ass on back in and I'll happily 'go yard' on your anti-intellectual farce, reinforcing your growing reticence.

Nice dodge though, given that the left was getting their collective ass handed to them pretty severely... and yes... I think we can all agree that this was the VERY MOST We could expect from you... So, to that extent, 'ya done good, Sport.'