What is a liberal?

I disagree. Some modern conservatives believe that when it comes to social issues that individuals can not be trusted to take care of themselves and want morality legislated according to their religious beliefs. Those who don't follow their brand of religion need the government to step in and save them from themselves. That isn't advocating smaller government or less government intrusion into our lives, quite the opposite.
We call them "neocons" and we don't like them. They're icky.

Let the public maintain their faith in god if they want, but it is not the role of government to do that for them or to be involved in promoting one brand of faith over the other. The founding fathers made that quite clear in the Constitution. However it seems that some conservatives would throw out a good portion of the first amendment to enforce their religious beliefs on others.
What USMC is talking about is the idea that whatever created man (whether that be God or evolution) endowed us with the rights talked about in the Constitution - not the government. Your rights came from whatever made you - not from a governing body of your peers, since the precedent that the government gives you rights would mean that the government would then be allowed to take them away. Which they are allowed to do - but only under extreme circumstances. That line about the "Creator" can be interpreted anyway you want - it is only the close-minded who read "Creator" and automatically think "God."

And some of those same conservatives are quick to disregard/forget about the sanctity of life once a baby is born. If society is going to outlaw abortion then it takes on the responsibility to ensure that every child is taken care after birth. The complaint about the economic costs are too high (taxes) and that they are paying for social services is a price that will have to be paid for the sanctity of life that they cry about.
I agree.

Some modern conservatives are quick to send our military out to fight yet aren't willing to make any kind of sacrifice, be it personal or economic to ensure that our military has the best support available. There is no call for sacrifice or to put our all. These people have plenty of stomach for a fight, as long as they can sit on the sidelines and cheer. No sense of personal responsibility for the actions they deem necessary for other to make yet they want the benefits of other's sacrifices (the cry of our national survival is at stake! comes quickly to mind).
Once again - those icky neocons.

Let me say that I am not making a blanket statement about ALL conservatives, thus my highlighting of some. What I have said above is what I see from some who identify themselves as conservative. The political landscape here in the US can't nor should it be broken down into a strictly liberal/conservative point of view. That is simplistic and ignores the complexities of people's lives, their interaction with friends, families and their community. All of us have opinions on differing subjects that doesn't reconcile with a strictly liberal/conservative point of view. Someone who hold a different viewpoint or doesn't agree with you should not be treated as your enemy, they are your friends, family, community and countrymen.
[/QUOTE]
And again...I agree.
 
Werbung:
Talk about spin. Conservatives believe in efficient government where the gov't upholds its primary functions of (#1) secuirty and (#2) sustaining essential infrastructure. They believe in the sovereignty of all individuals and thus, are proponents of the ideals of self-responsibility, hard work, and the opportunities presented by this great nation.

Liberals, on the other hand, believe that individuals cannot take care of themselves and must depend on large, centralized, undemocratic and bureaucratic institutions to control their lives for them. Liberals believe that Americans should be divided by color, by religion by sex and by income. Liberals believe that America is not a unique place; that the Constitution is an obstacle to their power and that to create a world order in which they rule supreme, America’s independence must be destroyed through places like the UN and through policies like open borders. They detest the American culture and they seek to destroy it.

please humor me with some examples of this in the last 6 years...


Conservatives recognize the nobility of the U.S. and the importance of maintaining the figure of God in the public square as a constant reminder of who exactly it was who endowed us with our inalienable rights -- the Creator and not the government.

Conservatives believe that it's no woman's right to chose whether to butcher a defenseless life because it poses inconvenience. It is not part of the mother -- it is living inside the mother. Again, that sanctity of life thing that liberals and conservatives disagree on.

Liberals are equally quick to go to war but then rarely have the stomach for the fight and are always the first to advocate retreat and unconditional surrender of our military.

See the difference

anyone see the difference in what Conservative believe and what elected Republicans have done over the last 6 years?
 
What USMC is talking about is the idea that whatever created man (whether that be God or evolution) endowed us with the rights talked about in the Constitution - not the government. Your rights came from whatever made you - not from a governing body of your peers, since the precedent that the government gives you rights would mean that the government would then be allowed to take them away. Which they are allowed to do - but only under extreme circumstances. That line about the "Creator" can be interpreted anyway you want - it is only the close-minded who read "Creator" and automatically think "God."

Exactly. Someone who gets it.

And to Schultz -- I understand that we're talking in sweeping generalities. I was defining conservatism as the brand which I practice. Of course there are always some who don't adhere to the philosophy. It's the same with liberals.
 
Exactly. Someone who gets it.

And to Schultz -- I understand that we're talking in sweeping generalities. I was defining conservatism as the brand which I practice. Of course there are always some who don't adhere to the philosophy. It's the same with liberals.


It wasn't clear that you were talking about your particular brand of conservatism.

As for the statement about our rights coming from the people, not the government I agree with that. People can quible over the meaning of "creator" all they want (as I believe that was the founding father's intention to be vague). The problem I have with modern conservatives who align themselves with the religious right is that they seem to believe that their moral beliefs need to be legislated, that people can't take responsibility for themselves so the government must act to do so. Many of these same people are the first to cry about political correctness, yet want legislation enacted so that their beliefs, often religious in nature aren't offended. That's still political correctness. My belief is that there should be minimal government intrusion into our personal lives at all times. Laws should benefit all people and be fair to them regardless of their beliefs. Don't deny me my right to practice my life in accordance with my beliefs just because they don't conform to yours. Worry about your own before trying to control mine.
 
It wasn't clear that you were talking about your particular brand of conservatism.

The problem I have with modern conservatives who align themselves with the religious right is that they seem to believe that their moral beliefs need to be legislated, that people can't take responsibility for themselves so the government must act to do so. Many of these same people are the first to cry about political correctness, yet want legislation enacted so that their beliefs, often religious in nature aren't offended. That's still political correctness. My belief is that there should be minimal government intrusion into our personal lives at all times. Laws should benefit all people and be fair to them regardless of their beliefs. Don't deny me my right to practice my life in accordance with my beliefs just because they don't conform to yours. Worry about your own before trying to control mine.

Those modern conservatives you're talking about are what we generally refer to as neocons (neo-conservatives) and they don't adhere to the basic precepts of conservatism - a small, defense-minded government with low taxes that favors utilitarian efficiency. "Legislating their morals," as you put it, increases the size of the government - which goes against the "small government" part of the traditional conservative approach.

Hopefully most neocons will eventually realize their intrinsic error and will revert to traditional conservatism, because it is the balance between real conservatism and real liberalism that keeps our government moderate. As the Democratic Party has shifted to the left over the years, so has the Republican Party - but the larger government under these left-leaning Republicans has been structured for favor their constituents. A bigger, yet business- and religious-oriented government is sure to get most liberals' hackles raised - hence the huge split between the parties that we've been seeing lately.

You can't totally blame the neocons for this; their shift left was an attempt to keep the divide between the two parties from getting too big. Unfortunately, that shift left encompassed only the political part of the spectrum, so the divide occurred anyway. And now we're living with the result - two political parties that are extremely confused about what they're supposed to stand for and how to proceed from here.

Anyway, that's how I view the situation. There are a few holes in the logic but that's just how that works sometimes.
 
Those modern conservatives you're talking about are what we generally refer to as neocons (neo-conservatives) and they don't adhere to the basic precepts of conservatism - a small, defense-minded government with low taxes that favors utilitarian efficiency. "Legislating their morals," as you put it, increases the size of the government - which goes against the "small government" part of the traditional conservative approach.

Hopefully most neocons will eventually realize their intrinsic error and will revert to traditional conservatism, because it is the balance between real conservatism and real liberalism that keeps our government moderate. As the Democratic Party has shifted to the left over the years, so has the Republican Party - but the larger government under these left-leaning Republicans has been structured for favor their constituents. A bigger, yet business- and religious-oriented government is sure to get most liberals' hackles raised - hence the huge split between the parties that we've been seeing lately.

You can't totally blame the neocons for this; their shift left was an attempt to keep the divide between the two parties from getting too big. Unfortunately, that shift left encompassed only the political part of the spectrum, so the divide occurred anyway. And now we're living with the result - two political parties that are extremely confused about what they're supposed to stand for and how to proceed from here.

Anyway, that's how I view the situation. There are a few holes in the logic but that's just how that works sometimes.

I've always associated neo-conservatives with those associated with the PNAC. That is why I wasn't using the term in regards to the modern conservatives which seem to have hijacked the Republican party. Other than that I agree pretty much with what you've said.
 
Liberals (stemming from the word LIBERTY) believe in equal rights for each citizen, both positive freedom (freedom to do) and negative freedom (freedom from restraint). Liberals today are more like 'deontological liberals' coined by John Rawls. Deontological liberals believe that each person is granted unalterable basic rights. I can't stand it when neo-cons and rednecks use 'liberal' in a derogatory fashion. Those idiots don't realize that they are bashing the 9th Amendment when using the word in that fashion. In my opinion, the conservatives of today make three major mistakes: 1. They believe that everyone is born with the same opportunity. They often site examples of one-in -a-million, extremely lucky people who are born into poverty, but overcome it. They then think they can judge everyone on economic status. 2. Conservatives believe that money in the hands of the rich will 'trickle-down' into the economy. B*** S***! All this does is give the rich (the small minority) control of the nation's economic destiny. All rich folks usually do is invest their surplus in hedge funds, etc. and pay immigrants to build large townhouses (all that money goes to Mexico). If the govt. would help the poor with basic needs (food, meds, rent,etc), the extra discretionary income the poor would have would be recirculated back into the domestic economy ten times as fast as the rich recirculate it (the little money the rich actually do recirculate into the domestic economy). I call this 'Trickle-Up Economics'--I invented it--you heard it here first! 3. The third big conservative mistake is that Conservatives believe that taxes are an 'UNnecessary evil.' How would they fund their oil war..um, I mean 'war on terror' and their hypocritical expansion of government (yes.. the Dept. of Homeland Security) if it weren't for taxes. The largest ammount of tax receipts ever collected (which is THIS year) is under Bush's administration. Conservatives today are a complete joke!!! What I'm getting at is that Liberals today believe in: basic rights for everyone; they have the balls to admit that taxes are a necessary evil; they have the balls to actually pay their taxes; they don't believe that the world is only 4,000 years old and that Jesus is going to come floating down from the clouds in a Chevy pickup and smite all the Muslims and teenagers who have had abortions; they can actually understand high school science and realize that the more CO2 you put in the air, the hotter the atmosphere becomes; and finally, they believe in having solid proof of WMDs before they go and destroy the birthplace of civilization.
 
Yes, and they spend more than the "liberal" Democrats do.

Yes they do. Just not on their people. Conservatives are very big on war and military spending. Contractors make a fortune when the pubbies are in charge i.e. Halliburton.:eek:

The money is there it's just how each side chooses to spend it that's different.
 
Yes they do. Just not on their people. Conservatives are very big on war and military spending. Contractors make a fortune when the pubbies are in charge i.e. Halliburton.:eek:

The money is there it's just how each side chooses to spend it that's different.

I would like to point out that this "money" that you think is there, is only obtained by confiscating it from the people that earned it.
 
USMC the Almighty;7467]Talk about spin. Conservatives believe in efficient government where the gov't upholds its primary functions of (#1) secuirty and (#2) sustaining essential infrastructure. They believe in the sovereignty of all individuals and thus, are proponents of the ideals of self-responsibility, hard work, and the opportunities presented by this great nation.
Well if that's true they sure aren't very good at it. I see them more as controlled by the religious right trying to enforce a religious doctrine on people and removing every social safety net that government provides to it's most needy... the poor... the elderly... the sick... the single parent with a small child. I see a predatory party that says fend for yourselves and if you can't make it then you probably deserve to suffer. Not a whole lot to be proud of there!

Liberals, on the other hand, believe that individuals cannot take care of themselves and must depend on large, centralized, undemocratic and bureaucratic institutions to control their lives for them. Liberals believe that Americans should be divided by color, by religion by sex and by income. Liberals believe that America is not a unique place; that the Constitution is an obstacle to their power and that to create a world order in which they rule supreme, America’s independence must be destroyed through places like the UN and through policies like open borders. They detest the American culture and they seek to destroy it.

I think what he's saying here is Conservatives (Republicans) are more alike and in one big luxury tent... while Liberals (Democrats) have to unite many different groups under one regular "off the shelf" tent to make everyone feel included. I think I probably agree with that.
On the seek to destroy the American culture statement I'll let everyone ponder that and decide on their own if they believe Liberals don't care about their friends and families and just want them all destroyed. The statement speaks for itself.


Conservatives recognize the nobility of the U.S. and the importance of maintaining the figure of God in the public square as a constant reminder of who exactly it was who endowed us with our inalienable rights -- the Creator and not the government.

There you go... it's a God thing... not a Separation of Church & State thing. I hear Taliban in there somewhere and it doesn't sound good to me. But everyone has a right to an opinion. As long as they wouldn't force me to abide by their opinion I'd be fine... unfortunately the forcing their opinion on everyone is what the Conservatives live life for.:eek:

Conservatives believe that it's no woman's right to chose whether to butcher a defenseless life because it poses inconvenience. It is not part of the mother -- it is living inside the mother. Again, that sanctity of life thing that liberals and conservatives disagree on.

In real people talk he's saying this: We Conservatives & God will now force you to do things our way. We are now in charge of your body & all of your bodily functions. You're bad for having sex out of wedlock and now you must pay the price regardless of the circumstances. The choice should not be between you and your family and your doctor. It's all up to us and what we believe. Granted no one saying we Conservatives have to have abortions but that's not the point... WE MUST CONTROL HER BODY!

Liberals are equally quick to go to war but then rarely have the stomach for the fight and are always the first to advocate retreat and unconditional surrender of our military.

Well I guess you've proven your case. As we all know Cheney, Rumsfield and Karl Rove all joined right up and served... oh, no... none of them were in the military at all. Well Bush did protect the US from an invasion from Mexico when he chose to show up at the Texas Air National Guard. But still look at Kerry an Murtha. Bunch of Stupid Decorated War Vets. Bunch of cowards... Good point!:mad:

See the difference?

Yeah my friend... we all see.
 
I can't stand it when neo-cons and rednecks use 'liberal' in a derogatory fashion.
I was going to respond to your rant and pick apart each point individually but this gem would make the effort a waste of time. You're simply disgusted at "neo-cons for their derogatory use of the term "liberal" while in the same breath using the term "redneck". Priceless really!

All hypocrisy aside, I use the term leftist extremist myself as mainstream liberalism is turning that wheel very sharply to the left these days.

-Castle
 
I would like to point out that this "money" that you think is there, is only obtained by confiscating it from the people that earned it.

I don't disagree. Taxing is in effect taking money from people to be used in various ways presumably for the greater good. An example: If you want interstate highways you need taxes to fund them. People aren't going to volunteer to go out and build a little section at a time on their own. Same thing with Social Security. If you don't want poverty stricken old age with poor elderly homeless, living on the streets & starving there needs to be a program to address that.

There's a lot of wasteful "pork" spending out there and I believe it should be eliminated as much as possible. But the basic social programs, the safety nets of this society shouldn't be withdrawn.

War spending is something we can save a lot on if done properly. Analise potential spending and exit strategy from the beginning. Most conflicts can be fought wastefully or not... it's a choice. Case in point is Iraq. Bombing them to soften them up and then going in to look for WMD's and to capture Hussein was nothing compared to over 4 years of escalating occupation.

Go in hard... have clearly defined goals & implement just those goals... get out and declare VICTORY! If you choose not to do that. If you choose to spend hundreds of billions (trillions) of hard earned tax payer dollars on some grand Nation Building scheme you become no safer while you devastate your own treasury.
 
Werbung:
Castle, first of all you're sadly mistaken. I'm not being hypocritical at all. It's not the fact that Conservatives are speaking in derogatory rhetoric that I can't stand, it's that they use the word 'liberal' to do it. You and your like are the hypocrites my friend. You talk all this trash about 'liberals' yet preach all this nonsense about how conservative ideology promotes liberty. Hello...'liberal'...'liberty.' At least you could use names like 'tree hugger' or 'bleeding heart.' You didn't find a gem, you found fools gold, hot dog. Besides, I pretty much am a redneck myself. I'm a Texan, and I definitely know when and where to use 'red neck' appropriately. 'Red neck' is only a derogatory term in the eyes of people who know little or nothing about Southern culture. Trust me, just about anyone in this part of the world that fits the stereotype of 'red neck' wouldn't mind being called such. 'White tr**h' would be another story, but
I didn't use that term, did I? Therefore, let's see you 'pick apart' my 'rant.' Let's see how you do partner.
 
Back
Top