Conservative?/Liberal?

Joe Nation wrote:

What does it reveal about the pollster if there are two ways to be a conservative but only one way to be a liberal?

Means he just learned that the last option needs to be added to the poll before submitting.

0 Replies

Portal Star wrote:

I am very conservative (if that is called conservative) on certain issues like government deregulation, tax simplification, feds giving more power/moey to states, decreasing federal government sponsored social programs (ex: social security.) I want to get rid of the rascist policy of affirmative action (which allows us to legally discriminate) and think the federal government should be primarily concerned with what it was created for - foreign politics/war. I am for the second amendment (against gun-control laws.)

On the other hand, I hold views that are considered "liberal." I want better education distributed more evenly with a ticket system like Gore was proposing. I am firmly against the government deciding what people can and cannot do with their own bodies, and that is why I am pro choice and want stem cell research. I want privacy laws, and I want to encourage free trade in foreign countries - which also helps prevent wars because of economic ties. I also think we should do no business with countries with blatant disregard for the human rights of its people (China.) Usually trade benefits another country, but not when the benefit goes to the government and not to the people. I think it's ridiculous for anyone to believe we should not have separate church and state, but I will defend the right of the church goers to have nativity scenes and practice freely (as long as not on official government property: ex: the courthouse.)

That's cool. I agree with all of Portal's "liberal" views (apart from Gore's education tickets, which I dont know much about, and where I'm sure it should have read "free trade with (not: in) foreign countries. And I disagree with all of his "conservative" views. Cool

Portal Star wrote:

I'm still thinking about voting for Libertarians (even though they are extremist) because their soft-core goals are things that I like. I'm also thinking about voting for nader if he gets on the ballot. Not sure yet. I definately won't be voting for Republicans or Democrats.

There seem to be a greatly above-average number of third party voters on this board, among the Americans - they're probably even more overrepresented than Democrats! (Can't help finding that sympathetic).

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

That's cool. I agree with all of Portal's "liberal" views (apart from Gore's education tickets, which I dont know much about, and where I'm sure it should have read "free trade with (not: in) foreign countries. And I disagree with all of his "conservative" views.

There seem to be a greatly above-average number of third party voters on this board, among the Americans - they're probably even more overrepresented than Democrats! (Can't help finding that sympathetic).

In the US, school funding is tied to property value in that area. you are only allowed to go to the school in the area district you live in. (that means there is no competition between schools and that rich areas get much more funding than poor areas.) Gore wanted kids to be allowed to chose their school, no matter where, and they would have a ticket - which would give money to the school they chose to go to for every day they attend. This redistributes eduational wealth and fosters healthy compeition to create better public schools.

Yes, I did mean to say trade -with.-

I am also not male, although I find it amusing that everyone thinks I am so don't spread it around.

0 Replies

Conservative, mostly. About the way nimh is liberal, if I may flatter myself.

0 Replies

Lusatian's Politics (tee hee)

Conservative in atypical (for America) fashion.

Militarism is the most prominent feature. Lusatian not only wants Pax Americana but wants it to closely resemble Pax Romana in many ways. Hawkish policy is the most predominant trend.

The form of militarism is ambitious and not isolationist in nature. Would be for or against nation building depening on the situation but is almost universally agreeable to nation entering.

Would approve almost any military adventure as long as it is militarily sound. The military is a well used tool in his toolbox.

Law enforcement is another prominent issue and Lusatian's preferred methodolgy is deep in the right.

Socially Liberal in nature but with complete tolerance for the most socially conservative policies when they become aligned with the parties he tends to support (i.e. would support party A for their hawkish policies and wouldn't have much objection to their socially conservative policies).

Economically apolitical for the most part. Eschews leftist sociology but the specifics of economic policy are not big hot button issues for Lusatian.

An atheist who will tolerate Christian fundamentalist policy merely because of its association with the hawkish policies in American politics.

Green. Very very Green. For god knows why. My guess is that it's an olive branch to earth because of the Hawkish part.

Summary, hawkish/right more so than conservative. Green teeth and if he were in Berkley would be socially liberal but in the military would be more socially conservative.

Totalitarian on days when so inclined (just to get a rise out of someone).

0 Replies

lib'er'al

Pronunciation: (lib'ur-ul, lib'rul), [key]
'adj.
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often cap.) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.

0 Replies

I would be interested in asking Lusatian and others what the term "liberal" means to them - it seems to have taken the oddest twists and turns in meaning in the US.

0 Replies

Lusatian wrote:

The first makes me chuckle, but relates more to my preference in leadership: "A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel." Robert Frost

The second and third I believe are related. Interpret what you will, I'd be happy to hear what the two compiled mean to you. "Liberal: a power worshipper without power." George Orwell
"Conservative. noun. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a liberal, who wishes to replace them with others." Ambrose Bierce

How do I interpret these, Lusatian?

Hmmm - the first I see as reflective of your "might makes right" tendencies - though it is funny.

The Orwell quote makes me go "huh"? I am wondering what the context and timing was. I think immediately of the British Liberal party, rather than the current America-think about the word - but that party enjoyed power for a long time, though declined around WW I. If it is an early quote, I suspect he may be referencing this - if a later one, I still go huh.

The Bierce quote is just plain funny.

I discern little in the way of political philosophy here, mere bons mot, (not that I don't love 'em - especially if I say them!) which are always especially funny when you are on their side...

0 Replies

I do not count myself as a typical Conservative Republican. The problem with most people is that they tend to lump everyone that they know into a convenient pigeonhole with a label.

Yes I stand with my fellow conservatives on many subjects, but my stand on other subjects is a bit 'off Party platform.:

* I have been a member of the Republican Party since I started voting back in 1984 and have voted in every election since. I even helped out on campaigns BEFORE I was old enough to vote.

* I have been a Union member in good standing for many many years (Laborers Union here in Fla.) and have been a Union Shop Steward and have been in on contract negotiations and yet was one of only a few avowed Republicans among my Union's members.

* I believe that Pro-Union/Pro-Labor does NOT have to mean Anti-Business because anything that causes business to be less competitive can result in businesses going under and less jobs for workers.

* I believe abortion is morally repugnant, but the right for women have the ability to choose is paramount. [/u]

* I don't believe gays should be given and special treatment because I think all the laws and rights guaranteed to all citizens should be theirs without hinderance. (like the ability to marry, etc)

* I don't believe in affirmative action because I believe that everyone should be judged on their own merits.

* Up until my most recent job, all my previous jobs have been in the manual labor field (gardener, landscaper) which are traditionally the bulwark of the Democratic Party and I also hold the record for holding the WORST job ever and yet still remain a staunch Republican.

* I support immigration (as the son of immigrants) and I also support entering the country legally.

* I believe that any abridgement of our Second Amendment rights are as repugnant and dangerous to the Republic as any infringements on the First Amendment.

* I believe in strong national defense. I do not believe that we need to get involved in every little brushfire conflict but that we need to be able maintain enough strength to GET involved if we need to.

* I believe that we are a wealthy enough nation to fund social welfare programs, but I also believe that welfare cannot be allowed to become a multi generational 'career' for families.

*I am a Christian, yet I stand against the loud and rabid minority that currently gets all of the press in my Party.

My views may be different from the 'rank and file' Conservatives, but thats what makes for interesting politics.

0 Replies

So, if I'm reading this right, if you weren't such a gun nut, you'd pretty much be a Democrat. Laughing

No wonder I like you so much.

Joe

0 Replies

Are you saying, Joe, that the Democrats are opposed to affirmative action. I have not seen or heard much that might confirm that.

0 Replies

too much speed reading

or too much speed.

0 Replies

Explanation approved!

0 Replies

What cracks me up about the conservative objection to affirmative action, "I believe everyone should be judged on their own merits", is I think so too, but let me tell you that tain't the way 'tis, 'tis it?
We humans are a pretty clubby bunch, we hire the sons of friends before the sons of strangers, we like making choices based on familiars, we let certain people get a pass which isn't based on any merit of their own, Bush gets into the Air National Guard, in order to keep the proper order in order. There's nothing unhuman about staying with what you know, it's just that humankind has never made much progress by sticking to that philosophy. It seems to me that it has always been the social segment in power who has avoided change, (natch)and it's the unempowered who push for inclusion.

We are, as a species, reluctant to interact with those we see as the other.
It is the role and duty of a democratic government to bring us together so that all become familiar to eachother.

0 Replies

Joe, you say that it is the government's responsibility to bring us together. I see that as akin to saying it's the government's responsibility to determine morality (a current Republican thesis). That is why I prefer to define myself as libertarian.

0 Replies

I think a democratic government can do many things like remove barriers: redlines in neighborhoods, hiring restrictions based on non-essential characteristics and cherry-picking of patients by public medical facilities, and still not impede on a person's sense of basic justice. There are others.

We've come a long way in the US. In 1913, in Massachusetts, my Irish grandfather could not buy a house nor join a carpenters's union. The reason for the first was he was Irish, the reason for the second was he was both Irish and Catholic. Seems bizarre now doesn't it? Maybe we should ask John Kerry?

It was the work of Democratic leaders (large D) who brought forth the reforms that changed things through government. When the civil rights movement began to make real strides in the 1950's it was liberal Democrats, risking the wrath of their Southern cousins who used the power of government to make changes that would have never come without such intervention.

Without that work we would be today discussing, not whether gays ought to be able to marry, but whether there can be a marriage between a white person and a negro?

We must always be on guard against the intrusion of government but not when such intrusion truly benefits the nation. And who's to say what will benefit the nation?

You and me, boyo, that's why they call it democratic.

Joe Nation

0 Replies

Ah, Portal is a woman - I knew that - why did I forget? Sorry about that ...

Portal Star wrote:

In the US, school funding is tied to property value in that area. you are only allowed to go to the school in the area district you live in. (that means there is no competition between schools and that rich areas get much more funding than poor areas.)

Really?

Your country doesn't cease to amaze me. In Holland, schools get extra funding dependent on the ratio of disadvantaged youth attending them (though not enough to wholly undo the discrepancy in opportunities these youngsters face)

Of course, by recounting this bit, you have also suggested a prime argument for the principle of affirmative action - if an affirmative action based on class rather than race - with the system slanted against the poor to such an extent, you need some kind of compensatory regulation.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Ah, Portal is a woman - I knew that - why did I forget?

Perhaps the "telefonische hulpdienst" could give an answer? :wink:

----------------

The situation in Germany is very similar to that in the Nehterlands

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

...I also hold the record for holding the WORST job ever and yet still remain a staunch Republican.

I remember a Christmas day several years back...when the job I had required that I clean the rest rooms of a very seedy go-go bar where I was a janitor. Christmas Eve had been a banner night -- or so I was told.

In any case, the vomit I had to scrub up was obviously from more than one person -- and at least one of them was obviously able to vomit up rather high on one wall. None of the vomiters -- (don't know how many there were) -- were particularly keen on hitting a toilet or a commode.

I'm willing to accept that you have the worst job ever -- but reluctantly.

Very reluctantly.

Conservative?/Liberal?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know