(they) are the liberals that live in a world of chocolate houses and candy cane trees.just dont sell law abiding citizens guns and the criminals wont want any either( sarcasm)
Storm, I think you have been listening to extreme conservatives too much, who usually only quote extreme liberals. Certainly your description applies to many liberals but just as many conservatives I know are just as detached from reality, just in the opposite direction.
I have many friends on both sides and have found they all typicaly want the same things. A safe and prosperous country where our children will have a better life than we did. It is how to get there that we dissagree on.
That safe idea is false. For there are child molesters, rapists, murderers in the world and guns are only a small token of things that make the world unsafe.
You are not going to change the world into a peaceful place when people have different ideas or culture.
Especially, when those have different ideas or culture than yours.
i also wish we had a safe country,i wish i didnt have to carry a pistol.
i live in texas(border crossings w/drugs happening) im not going to allow myself or loved ones to get caugth in a bad situation just because some rich liberal wants gun control, even as thier body guards are armed to the teeth.honest citizens getting rid of thier guns is insane.it leaves only criminals with weapons.have you ever noticied how hollywood actors that always use guns in movies wine about how bad guns are? what hypocricy.
if there is a common sense solution i cant think of one the way things are now.
Well, I can't argue with that. I am suggesting that not all liberals are so hypocritical. Also I think the "dehumanizing" of people with differing political beliefs is really doing alot of damage in our country and keeping us from worthwhile solutions. Congress is a great example of this!
i completely agree.
also i dont hang around w/hard core conservatives, i live in austin which if anything, is super liberal.maybe thats the reason im more conservative. we really have some loonys that live here.austins motto is ( keep austin weird) i swear its true.
There is a strange irregularity upon the term or description of liberal. In the 60's, hippies/the youth, did not desire to have government (“the man”) interfere with the public. Call it certain freedoms, liberals of that time period, did not desire to be under government control.
Nowadays, liberals seem to want more government intervention. And the oddity is, those same (from the 60's) liberals against the government, “the man”, are NOW part of the government or “the man” themselves
I've noticed this too. What seems to have happened is that the more right-wing media have twisted the use of the word 'liberal' to denote many things which are actually the complete opposite of what it actually means. (e.g. anti-freedom, pro 'big government' etc.) They seem to be trying to turn it into a buzzword for all things 'un-American' in the same way that they did with words like 'commie' in the 1950's.
Johno pretty much nailed it. When I did my politics A level* though we were taught two seperate branches of liberalism (positive liberty v negative liberty) and one did favour more government involvement than the other one. However in both cases one of the most basic foundations for Liberalism as an idealogy was that people should be allowed to do what they want unless it effected other people. I actually found Classical Liberalism as I was taught it to have a fair amount in common with Conservatism surprisingly. Differing opinions on the why certain things should be done, but in practice had some similiar ideas. You can get copies of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty dirt cheap on Amazon if you're that interested in what Liberalism really is.
But yeah, now its just used as a catch all term to mean anyone who isn't right wing. And in America it seems to be anyone who disagrees with the Republicans.
*I did only get a C so don't be surprised if someone comes in and tells me everything I write from now on is wrong
The modern day Conservative Party is basically 'liberal' by the traditional use of the word. For example, they abandoned their support for economic protectionism in the 1840's (when they were still just the Tories) and became staunch supporters of free trade, which was traditionally more of a Whig doctrine. (I suspect that everything the Conservatives hold most dear are things which they were at one time passionately opposed to. Like democracy, and the NHS.)
yes,you are right. even though i know many so called liberals that do have some good ideas.i cosider myself a libertine because i just want most gov. agencies to leave me alone.
the media is to blame for a lot of problems at least creating problems when there really are hardly any to begin with.journalism has become more like a gossip mongering talk show these days.i grew up listing to real reporters like walter cronkite.i rarely watch t.v. these days,its a wasteland mostly.
In my opinion, the real political debate in the US is and always has been Libertarian vs. Totalitarian. Unfortunatly the totalitarians have had control over both parties for quite some time now. I have to laugh when I see my conservative friends talking about dictator Obama. Bush passed the patriot act, that is at least as much of a power grab as anything Obama has done.
I think your right, there is some bright spots in the up and comers, at least they are "talking the talk", however it doesn't seem that the Libertarians can get a strong hold in the political arena. Why is that? if Americans want to have more freedom, you would think that there would be more Libertarian politicians in Washington. Anyone know?
Hard to get elected if no rich companies will fund you. Monsanto isn't gonna give money to a guy who will cut off their tax breaks and whatever other special benifits they get. If you get down to state and local levels, libertarians are much more common. Also I think their position on abortion causes many christians to refuse support, no matter how much they agree with the other stuff.