Ask Me Help Desk - Are you a liberal?

Are you a liberal?

Hello:

If not, you SHOULD be. This is what MY president, JFK, said about liberalism:

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.”

That's WHY I'm a liberal too.

excon

Maybe OBAMA should read that. Class warfare is not liberalism. Taking from one and giving to another is Marxism. " break through the stalemate" Harry Reid just did that by trampling the rights of the minority vote.

You forgot the beginning of that quote :
"What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal."

I am certain that he would find little common ground with the faction that began taking over his party in 1972. I can get into specifics . In the 1960 election he was the pro-defense hawk accusing Ike and Nixon of allowing the US to fall behind the Soviets. In his inaugural he stated that the US would pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty
His big government programs like NASA and the Peace Corp were designed as cold war weapons .
Domestically he argued for ,and enacted supply side tax cuts to stimulate the economy . His advisors like John Kenneth Galbraith suggested the pump priming stimulus that we are used to seeing from the liberals. He chose a different course ("an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income
taxes," ) . He argued that would rise the tide that would lift all boats .

He was by today's standards conservative when it came to welfare . His economic advisor , James Tobin ,said that if welfare was too generous, families would have an incentive to remain on the dole rather than working and producing. H had a pro-growth economic policy,and free trade and a strong dollar policy.

Now I will give you some quotes and ask if these are "liberal" quotes ...
The ever expanding power of the federal government, the absorption of many of the functions that states and cities once considered to be responsibilities of their own, must now be a source of concern to all those who believe as did the great patriot, Henry Grattan that: “Control over local affairs is the essence of liberty.” (Commencement Address, University of Notre Dame, January 29, 1950)
If it is in the public interest to maintain an industry, it is clearly not in the public interest by the impact of regulatory authority to destroy its otherwise viable way of life. (Message to the Congress on Regulatory Agencies, April 13, 1961)
Those aren't quotes today's liberals would make.

I am constantly accused of being a libtard by my ultra conservative friends. I let it stand.
I am mostly liberal, a little bit conservative, a bit more moderate. Mostly I pay no attention to the labels. But this country's problems have a lot to do with the rigid demands of the two parties. That wasn't the intent when the nation formed.

I am a liberal and believe in we the people. I Vote, sometimes that's good enough to get the guys you want, sometimes its not.

Surviving no matter who wins and thriving is a personal responsibility, but now is not the time to repeal the social safety net. Expand it until the job creators actually do their job, or trickle down more than they have. Supply side economics is great when the valves are all open, but sucks when they aren't. Yeah I would make 'em open them valves up or go back to their other names... greedy rich basturds.

Yeah, I'm a liberal, because we the people means everybody, not just a FEW.

Liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Accoring to the philosophies included here, I am a liberal and so should you all be, but republicanism has withdrawn from the principles of liberalism and sought to reimpose the politics of privilege. Liberalism is not socialism.

the liberalism of the last 60 years does not resemble the liberalism of the age of enlightenment . Liberalism has been coopted by the progressive movement . JFK would not have identified with the liberalism his youngest brother was a champion of .

Something has changed, maybe both parties have, as the far right has shrunk the repubs and coalitions are growing the dems.

Tom you really need to stop defining things by that pecular american experience which puts a tag on things, no matter how unrepresentative they might be. When I speak to you of democracy, you speak to me of republicanism, When I speak to you of liberalism, you speak to me of socialism. It is possible to have compassion without abandoning liberal ideals. You country, no matter what it thinks of itsself, is not a liberal democracy and I know you agree with me. The reforms of recent times are not socialism

Quote:

You country, no matter what it thinks of itsself, is not a liberal democracy and I know you agree with me. The reforms of recent times are not socialism

D@mn right we are not a liberal democracy and thank God for that ! Tell that to the progressive Fabian Democrats who run the country . The " reforms " as you call them ,are what the fabians can get away with . The emperor's term is not over ,and in the 1st year of his 2nd term you've seen some incredible executive power grabs .He rules by fiat from the White House ,and the only checks against his power is ineffective Congress and the courts . He now has the means to pack the courts in a way that FDR would not have even dared .

Without wishing to state the obvious... that's why you are in the situation your find yourself. You think things are going to be different with a change of electoral chair shuffling? I am sure the next president will behave himself.

Hello again, tom:

Quote:

He now has the means to pack the courts in a way that FDR would not have even dared .

The problem we have here, is an unabiding refusal by ONE side to accept REALITY. I think there was a thread with that name around here somewhere..

To SOME, passing a law via the Constitutional process is RAMMING it down peoples throats, and filling court vacancies is PACKING the court.

As long as these distortions of reality are in the mix, we're gonna BE mixed up. That's why you should be a liberal, tom. We're NOT mixed up at all.

excon

If it were anything like "we the people" there would be no ACA. We the people told them loud and clear NO and they did it in spite of what "we the people" told them to do.

Must not be enough of you people to win an election and do things YOUR way. We won, and you will benefit. For sure the status quo you try to maintain hasn't worked for us people. And I doubt it worked very well for your people either.

Bet they sign up for ACA too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:
The problem we have here, is an unabiding refusal by ONE side to accept REALITY. I think there was a thread with that name around here somewhere..

To SOME, passing a law via the Constitutional process is RAMMING it down peoples throats, and filling court vacancies is PACKING the court.

As long as these distortions of reality are in the mix, we're gonna BE mixed up. That's why you should be a liberal, tom. We're NOT mixed up at all.

excon

Throughout our history advise and consent meant that a nominee for the court had to pass a super majority threshold ....until this week .

You can dispense with the "we won" nonsense, it's what you do after you win that matters. The job of a congressman is to represent and on Obamacare they did not represent our wishes.

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

The job of a congressman is to represent and on Obamacare they did not represent our wishes.

Let's review, shall we? Certainly, the congressmen who represented YOUR wishes didn't have enough votes to make YOUR wishes law. That's how it works here, in this great country of ours.

The congressmen who represented the MAJORITY of the people, DID have enough votes to make their constituents wishes LAW, and that's what they did. Again, that's how it works around here.

Now, you can keep on saying that YOUR minority wishes WEREN'T carried out, and that means the law was rammed down your throat, but it's just not so, and I'll remind you of it whenever necessary...

excon

I guess the blue states that are working toward implementation don't count as we, or the millions that have a chance and want health insurance. And what will those that want it but can't get it in red states going to do?

Oh that's right you guys don't have to do anything for your own citizens in need. And have not done anything for their health care needs and is probably why red states have such a high rate of uninsured.

Quote:

Oh that's right you guys don't have to do anything for your own citizens in need. And have not done anything for their health care needs and is probably why red states have such a high rate of uninsured

.

What gets me Tal is that if they identified the same level of poverty in a third world country they would be looking to exploit it, but when it is at home it can be ignored

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:
Let's review, shall we? Certainly, the congressmen who represented YOUR wishes didn't have enough votes to make YOUR wishes law. That's how it works here, in this great country of ours.

The congressmen who represented the MAJORITY of the people, DID have enough votes to make their constituents wishes LAW, and that's what they did. Again, that's how it works around here.

Now, you can keep on saying that YOUR minority wishes WEREN'T carried out, and that means the law was rammed down your throat, but it's just not so, and I'll remind you of it whenever necessary...

excon

That would be really interesting to see you prove with more than rhetoric.