Why do you support liberalism?

[rdean]

Why do so may, especially those in the GOP and the Tea Party movement, equate working on solutions to major problems as "government control?"

Do you not agree that there are issues that, if not addressed, will completely cripple this country? Do you honestly think a resolution to those problems can be found any where else but in Congress?

I agree with you that had we done things differently over the past 30 years we would not be facing these problems. That has absolutely nothing to do with where we now are! We've made a ton of mistakes in the past! Now, we either let those mistakes wreck us, or we act like grownups and work to correct 'em.

What problems has the government ever fixed?

When "government" has gotten serious about working on really major issues, it has done a remarkable job! Just to name a few.................got us out of The Great Depression, won a couple of World Wars, brought the veterans home from World war II and created the greatest middle class in the history of the world, built an interstate highway system which was the envy of the world, did the same by building a great public school system.

"Government" can work............most of the reason it no longer does so is because of us! Too many of us now prefer our politics to be more like professional wrestling instead of a method of working on the problems we face.

The problem with these right wingers is they believe their own "over the top" press.

For some reason, they desperately want to believe there is this shadow, secret, conspiratorial government that spends it's it's time peering around corners and taking notes in little black books to be turned over to the "Over-king".

They couldn't be more ridiculous. Our government is made up of people who live right down the street and who were, for the most part, fairly voted into office. People like "Scott Brown" who drives a truck.

Sure, you get greedy assholes. But if more people actually followed a little politics, we could vote them out of office.

 

[JBeukema]

Would you feel good driving down a highway where all speed limits had been removed?

Works for the Germans

They just kinda recommend what they think works and let you decide whether you like it. I think it's called voluntary compliance.

 

[Bern80]

Let's try to talk rationally about your complaints:

1. "Solutions were offered by Republicans.".......... I assume you're talking about Health Care Reform. Yes, "Solutions were offered by Republicans"...................and many of them were incorporated into what was finally passed. That doesn't change the fact that the GOP stance, as a Party, was to use the health care debate to make it Obama's "Waterloo." No one with an ounce of political and intellectual honesty can pretend that the goal of the GOP was to make Health Care reform BETTER! Had they taken that stance, we, as a Nation, would be far, far better of than we are today!

2. "The right doesn't want to solve problems?"..............."It wasn't that the left wanted health care reform and the right didn't.".........."It was an issue of the left wanted to solve the problem and how the right would have solved it.".........Ditto above!

3. "Compromise is fine in some instances, but when your 'solution' to a problem is fundamentally unsound I have zero problem with the right repeating NO."............That is the main reason we are almost ready to follow Greece over a cliff. It isn't that Compromise is the problem.............the problem is "NO" is the answer before a compromise is ever proposed!
History has shown us that there isn't a problem we can't handle...........if both sides agree there is a problem, and both sides agree that they will work until a solution is reached. History has also shown us that we can never, ever solve a major issue with just one party!

The issue isn't if we can solve a problem..........the question is if we have the will to get together and work on that problem until we reach a consensus in law while telling the political radio comedians to be damned!

Then I think you need to consider whether your goal is compromise or to actually make things better. Compromise, in my opinion, is overrated. Compromise is not the way to the best solution for any problem. Compromise results in a watered down version of a solution.

The problem is their are a myriad possible ways to solve a problem. Unfortunately many of the solutions get associated as being right wing or left wing solutions and get discounted from the opposing side out of hand.

The question of the thread is why you do you support liberalism. So we first have to define liberalism. IMO liberalism today is centralized government based solutions to problems. And I am not a liberal because the history of government trying to solve problems is pretty piss poor. The problem of the elderly needing income and medical care? The government solution is going bankrupt. The problem of people not be able to afford homes? The CRA under Carter can undeniably be blamed for the economic downturn. History shows that government SUCKS at solving problems. On the other hand there are very few examples of free market solutions failing. Why? Because no one has the balls to try them. No one has the balls to hand that level of accountability and responsibility to the people.

 

[HUGGY]

Define..

There's a Huge Difference between, Classic Liberalism & Modern Liberalism.

not really.

there's a difference between progressivism and liberalism. and certain people think all democrats are liberals and all republicans are conservatives. technically, the republican party is reactionary.

and there are people who think anything that isn't to the right of atilla the hun is 'liberal'.

I think it is unfair to the Huns to smear Atillas name by associating it with christian fascists.

Atilla had the courage of his convictions and once he worked out his differences with his family he was very successful. He lead his men in battle. He was brave.

Neo con christian fascists are cowards. They want to send someone else to fight the wars they start. Compared to Atilla the Hun they are scum.

 

[rightwinger]

Why do so may, especially those in the GOP and the Tea Party movement, equate working on solutions to major problems as "government control?"

Do you not agree that there are issues that, if not addressed, will completely cripple this country? Do you honestly think a resolution to those problems can be found any where else but in Congress?

I agree with you that had we done things differently over the past 30 years we would not be facing these problems. That has absolutely nothing to do with where we now are! We've made a ton of mistakes in the past! Now, we either let those mistakes wreck us, or we act like grownups and work to correct 'em.

Most of those "mistakes" have been caused by misguided do-gooder/moral preening gubmint policies.

How do you expect to trust the arsonist to put out the fire?

You talk so much bullshit all the time.

So remove government from everything. At the "very worst", other countries would waltz in and carve us up.

But look at "only bad". Republicans deregulated everything and replaced it with "voluntary compliance". What do we get? Mining disasters. Oil spills. Dirty air. Dirty water. Fucked up economy.

Would you feel good driving down a highway where all speed limits had been removed? In a car built without any safety regulations? Now that I think about it, maybe you would.

The right wing "the government ***** up everything they have a hand in" reflects their simplistic views of how modern societies operate.

Their yearning for the "good ole days" when the government minded their own business would bring us polluted air and water supplies, unsafe food and drugs, unsafe workplaces, rampant discrimination......oh for the "good ole days"

 

[Bern80]

The right wing "the government ***** up everything they have a hand in" reflects their simplistic views of how modern societies operate.

Their yearning for the "good ole days" when the government minded their own business would bring us polluted air and water supplies, unsafe food and drugs, unsafe workplaces, rampant discrimination......oh for the "good ole days"

And the 'evil corporate America will screw us all if given the chance' isn't equally as simplistic and stupid?

You you have no concept of social contracts and you prove my point about the left wanting zero personal accountability. Why does a third partyu (government) need to step into the middle of an agreement of payment for goods/services between two parties? That's how the free market works unchecked. If you don't like the terms of the deal don't take it. You don't apparently get that the way free markets operate from a business stand point is doing what the consumer wants. Obviously a drug company endangering it's clientele is not in their best interests. The system is self regulating, It doesn't require government.

 

[Zona]

I'd love to see some of the answers here.

Because the oposite of liberalism almost destroyed our country recently.

 

[Founder]

I lean more towards liberalism over conservatism because i don't believe in government by golden rule. That is, I don't want those that have the gold making the rules. I see the government's role as establishment of a level playing field that is balanced in its fairness to business owners, workers, and consumers. I wouldn't care to go back to the days before the labor movement. I believe the government has a role in establishing standards regarding workers' safety, approving drugs that pharmaceutical companies wish to market, and environmental regulations to protect the air I breathe and water I drink.

]I can't think of anyone that wouldn't agree with you in general. However, Liberals go far beyond what you have stated and seized power and misused it way beyond what is good for us and all living things.

They have dis-empowered the family, the churches, private education, the private practice of medicine, and the employers excessively and taken that power unto themselves. The problem is how we can have GOOD government, not just government. I have suggestions, one of which is suppression of ALL special interests, and ALL interests as well. There is only one interest as Washington said, "The National Interest," or put another way, the People's Interest.

We need a party and politicians that can appeal to people like you and to the best Conservatives, like myself. I believe our best bet is a revitalized Republican Party, and NOT the Democrat Party. We gave them power and they have totally blown it.

 

[California Girl]

They don't apply the term "liberal", you do...The socialist wing to your party stole the term back in the 1920s, in order to obfuscate their true motives and ends.

If anyone has destroyed the meaning of the term, it's the most illliberal "liberals".

JFK said it best ...thank you

All JFK did was spout one giant platitude...Something else that modern "liberals" are fond of.

What I find fascinating is this ability of today's 'liberals' to claim Kennedy when most of what the 'liberals' of today want would be abhorrent to JFK. They quote him for convenience and pretend that his principles are theirs. They are not.

Most of us, including the conservatives agree with Kennedy.... We also 'care' about our fellow man. I have yet to see a 'liberal' provide evidence that Kennedy agreed with the redistribution of wealth.

 

[California Girl]

Seems like you're a 1950s REPUBLICAN, then.

Or maybe you're a early 19th century Bull Moose Party supporter like Teddy Roosevelt

Kinda sucks to be an anachronism, doesn't it, Gil?

Know that you're in good company, though.

I have no complaints. One thing about being liberal, I feel no peer pressure about the extent of how far I carry my beliefs. I think I have a lot more freedom in that regard than do conservatives who seem hellbent on defining who's a member of the club. As far as the 50's go, I barely recall the Kennedy-Nixon battle, but I hope that I would have stood with the liberals in supporting Civil Rights.

Considering that you have previously stated that Obama voted against the war in Iraq, I wonder why anyone would take anything you say with an ounce of credibility.

 

[JW Frogen]

I am a liberal because in Australia that means I am a conservative, and I am a fascist because in Australia that means I am a libertarian, and I am gay because in Australia that means...........wait, cancel the last one.

Still, I like Pricella, Queen of the Desert.

 

[maineman]

I have yet to see a 'liberal' provide evidence that Kennedy agreed with the redistribution of wealth.

as a US Senator, JFK voted for federal income tax laws that perpetuated a progressive system of taxation. as president he signed them into law. Anything other than a flat tax is, by definition a "redistribution of wealth".

thanks for playing.

 

[sweetie]

...good god, what a stooooopid **** question!..

...here are the big 'differences' between the stooopid **** 'liberal' republicrats and the stooooopid **** 'conservative' republicrats:

...as to 'the drug war..' stooopid **** liberals tend to favor drug prohibition with forced drug counselling as 'the punishment'..whereas stoooopid **** 'conservatives' tend to favor drug prohibition with jail as 'the punishment'.. (decent, non-republicrat people know enough to mind their own business)..

...as to 'foreign policy'..stooooopid **** 'liberals' tend to favor world-wide policemanship while seeking UN approval before going to war..whereas stooooopid **** 'conservatives' tend to favor world-wide policemanship and unilateral war-making decisions..(again..decent, non-republicrat people know enough to mind their own business..)

...i could go onandonandonandonandon here..but maybe you stooooopid **** republicrats get the point?

..(also, 'both' 'liberals and conservatives' are painfully ignorant about the hideous, fraudulent money system that enslaves us all)

...stfu, republicrats..

 

[Douger]

Only a complete idiot supports any "ism"

 

[Care4all]

you said that and i don't see a difference. perhaps if you're more specific?

Supposedly Liberalism today is Fabian Socialism or whatever semantic garbage people are using. I only use the label of Liberalism personally as it probably best fits (though perhaps not all too well) where I stand.

there is NO CIVILIZATION, without social-ism....

We became civilized, when we began sharing in community duties...(social duties)

Farming was the beginning of us developing communities that surrounded it and we no longer had to be nomadic to gather/hunt for food....this was the beginning of civilization, the civilized world.

 

[Old Rocks]

They don't apply the term "liberal", you do...The socialist wing to your party stole the term back in the 1920s, in order to obfuscate their true motives and ends.

If anyone has destroyed the meaning of the term, it's the most illliberal "liberals".

JFK said it best ...thank you

All JFK did was spout one giant platitude...Something else that modern "liberals" are fond of.

All I have seen you do here is spout idiocy, regardless of subject.

 

[Christopher]

JFK said it best ...thank you

All JFK did was spout one giant platitude...Something else that modern "liberals" are fond of.

What I find fascinating is this ability of today's 'liberals' to claim Kennedy when most of what the 'liberals' of today want would be abhorrent to JFK. They quote him for convenience and pretend that his principles are theirs. They are not.

Most of us, including the conservatives agree with Kennedy.... We also 'care' about our fellow man. I have yet to see a 'liberal' provide evidence that Kennedy agreed with the redistribution of wealth.

Exactly, here is another quote from Kennedy from his inaugural address:
American Rhetoric: John F. Kennedy -- Inaugural Address

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it. And the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

He sounds "conservative" in this speech, he mentions protecting our freedom, telling people not to ask the government to do things for them, mentions God and praying to God for help. To me, this does not sound very "liberal" according to today's "liberals".

 

[Care4all]

he's not conservative, though you can try to claim such....he is the perfect example of liberal, the liberal that I have known.....

Don't brush that paint too widely.

 

[paperview]

Only a complete idiot supports any "ism"

Does that apply to conservatism?

How about activism?
commercialism?
constitutionalism?
constructivism?

creationism?

Do these help your neuroticism?


How 'bout this one:

Absurdism!

 

[rightwinger]

Quote:
In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it. And the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.


He sounds "conservative" in this speech, he mentions protecting our freedom, telling people not to ask the government to do things for them, mentions God and praying to God for help. To me, this does not sound very "liberal" according to today's "liberals".

Once again we have conservatives defining what being a liberal means. As usual...its the same old "liberal means you want to give everyone a handout and nobody has to work"

Kennedy is talking about working together for the good of the whole. He is talking about the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

As a conservative you need to keep in mind that the wealthy get handouts from the government too. The "ask not what your country can do for you...but what you can do for your country" applies more to the wealthy than to the poor.