Cantilever Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Don't speak for "history". Speak for yourself, that is what you are doing. OK History books say different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyjake Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Can't answer about as a group.Liberals with who you can discuss different points of view like reasonable people I respect.The ones who answer your point of view with 'You are going to have to quit listening to Rush and getting those crazy ideas' I can't have respect for their views as they have none for mine.I don't listen to Rush. Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantilever Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 I thought it was satire. My bad. Knight is right. We are all adjusting, but laughing at somone in the middle of a serious discussion is not respectful and does not promote further discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Knight is right. We are all adjusting, but laughing at somone in the middle of a serious discussion is not respectful and does not promote further discussion. Seriously, I thought it was satire. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight771 Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 That I agree with. I think its hard for some to say in fear of some kind of backlash. But to call either of them generally bad, I just cant take it seriously. Unless you think half the country is bad and half the country is good. History proves both have great qualities within them. I find most of the picking apart to be partisian based. What makes this country great is the mix of ideals IMO. The whole melting pot thing IMO is what really made this country be as great as it is. I believe this is way too simplistic. Very few hold "all" liberal or conservative positions. There is a whole spectrum throught political opinion and thought. Being against the death penalty is considered a "liberal" position but though I am one of the more conservative people on here, I oppose the death penalty. There is a very leftwing writer for one of the NYC journals who is a socialist, an athiest, and pro-life. Forget his name at the moment. There are conservatives like Pat Buchanan who are very isolationist and liberals like Hil who are for free trade and strong defense. So, there is no 50-50 split on who is wrong and who is right. But I would say the farther left you are, the more wrong and the more dangerous and the more distructive to the USA you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollincoal Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Back for just a second. This is one of my favorite poems of all time and was written by Rudyard Kipling more than 100 years ago. I loved it the first time I read it more than 30 years ago and pretty much agree with it. The Gods of the Copy Book Headings are conservatism. The Gods of the Market Place are liberalism. This is why I feel liberalism = decadence. I like these kind of posts "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill" "If you know that and you don't know anything else you know more than if you know everything else and you don't know that." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollincoal Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 To those that do not respect liberals(as a group), does that group include John Locke or Adam Smith? "If you know that and you don't know anything else you know more than if you know everything else and you don't know that." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight771 Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 I am not the only one who feels the way I do: : http://cnsnews.com/news/article/68444 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishinambition Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Some liberals are worthy of at least a little respect. Just a little though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight771 Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 To those that do not respect liberals(as a group), does that group include John Locke or Adam Smith? rollincoal, Again, don't confuse the small l liberalism with what we are discussing today. We are really talking about social liberalism and socialism/progressivism and statism. Liberalism from the 19th century was a totally different cat. Just as JFK would probably be considered mostly conservative today, "liberalism" the term has moved further and further left in its goals, opinions and aims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantilever Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 So, there is no 50-50 split on who is wrong and who is right. But I would say the farther left you are, the more wrong and the more dangerous and the more distructive to the USA you are. I agree wtih that, but maybe I think the further someone is on the far ends of either side, the closer they are to being dangerous and distructive. Even things of good intentions can become bad when put to the extremes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollincoal Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 rollincoal, Again, don't confuse the small l liberalism with what we are discussing today. We are really talking about social liberalism and socialism/progressivism and statism. Liberalism from the 19th century was a totally different cat. Just as JFK would probably be considered mostly conservative today, "liberalism" the term has moved further and further left in its goals, opinions and aims. I'm not confusing the two, the question is asked with a "L" and a "l". "If you know that and you don't know anything else you know more than if you know everything else and you don't know that." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichum Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 To those that do not respect liberals(as a group), does that group include John Locke or Adam Smith? I distinguish classical liberalism from social liberalism/modern liberalism/welfare liberalism. From Wiki : "Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable, and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights : "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature-rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism or welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others. Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are "hostile to the welfare state." They do not have an interest in material equality but only in "equality before the law."Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual ." "Who is John Galt?" Who? You? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollincoal Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 I find the original question to be antagonistic as it seeks to determine the "validity" of people based on a "label" bestowed on them wether they resemble it or not. "If you know that and you don't know anything else you know more than if you know everything else and you don't know that." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ Posted June 25, 2010 Report Share Posted June 25, 2010 Knight771 posted in reply - Just as JFK would probably be considered mostly conservative today, "liberalism" the term has moved further and further left in its goals, opinions and aims. John Fitzgerald Kennedy would be run out of office on a rail by the likes of Moveon.org, funded by George Soros, supported by the likes of Chris Mathews, Rachael Maddow, Maureen Dowd, and just about every leading democrat in offies and at the DNC. Pelosi, Boxer, Schumer, Edwards, Obama, the Chicago Gang in the White House, Fienstine and the entire liberal set in California and New York. I have a couple of liberal friends who do not mind crossing idological swords, but most of my liberal friends go immediately to "I don't want to discuss this anymore" or a hissy fit that ends up in a long string of cuss words. Most of the latter group are female and highly educated. They come from several ethnic groups, (Irish, Italian,Jewish and German mostly) so I believe they were innoculated with thier "intollerance of disent from any person or group" during their college years, or by mummszy or dadszey! I don't respect any person who runs away from an discussion that includes a request to prove their contensions or feelings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to register here in order to participate.
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now