Where is the US economy headed?

This brings up an interesting point. I have noticed that disagreement with liberals is interpreted by them as rudeness. Also disapproval of behavior is even interpreted as hatred. It seems like a weird mindset with an inability to feel good about themselves unless they have universal approval of their every belief or action.

Thanks ican, I appreciate that of course. I also appreciate your posts as well, which often contains much statistics, but sad to say I don't often take the time to analyze all of them. It would be nice to have a few more conservative posters here to further enforce the voices of reason. I kind of miss Foxfyre.

Lest I be accused of broad brushing, I should say that some of the most staunch liberals do what I have described above, but not all liberals think that way or react that way.

Your brush hasn't made a straight line since you started "painting" with your brain.

There is nothing straight about okie.

Although not from a college text in political science, here are some excerpts from wiki on liberalism:

The word "liberalism" has a somewhat different meaning in the United States and, to a lesser extent, in Britain than it does in continental Europe, where it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies and more closely corresponds to the American definition of libertarianism (a term that in Europe is often restricted to left-libertarianism).
Today the word "liberalism" is used differently in different countries. One of the greatest contrasts is between the usage in the United States and usage in Continental Europe. According to Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (writing in 1956), "Liberalism in the American usage has little in common with the word as used in the politics of any European country, save possibly Britain. . . However, there are also major distinctions between modern American liberalism and the European notion of social democracy, specifically, the lack of socialist influences and programs.

Firstly, while socialists generally follow the principle of maximin (and believe the state is the proper organization to achieve it), American liberals are more likely to limit government actions to the point where they guarantee a decent quality of life, and decent public services to working families and poor workers. Social democratic programs are aimed at providing national welfare programs for the entire country, while American liberal social programs are designed to assist only lower-class individuals.

Secondly, American liberals are less likely to countenance nationalization of private sector industries as a solution to any problem; this is in contrast to socialists, who often have sought or implemented nationalization of industries in their countries.

Third, American liberalism attempts to achieve a fairer distribution of power in society, as opposed to just a more fair distribution of wealth.

pom, That may explain "liberalism" but fails to identify "liberals" which is the crux of my disagreement with okie.

Good evening to everyone.
Earlier on, when we were discussing Fannie/Freddie and the housing bubble etc., I made the argument that home ownership, long espoused as the great American dream, may no longer be appropriate today.
NPR this evening had 2 stories on that. If you have the time, please visit NPR.org and click on the audio (about 2 minutes) titled "One couple's new American dream: rent, don't buy."
There is another story linked to that covering the same issue somewhere there. I forget the title.
The audio story is much more interesting then the brief print version.

Actually pom, that isn't too bad as a definition. The only thing I would add is the fact that there are degrees of liberalism, which would also not disagree with your article. I would say that liberalism and liberals in the United States runs the gamut from advocating some socialism to complete socialism.

I think also that the subject of liberalism vs conservatism is used somewhat interchangeably with Left vs. Right, and so if you take a Bill Ayers for example, or some of the people with Marxist sympathies that Obama has appointed, those people are ultra leftists and some of them advocate going to a communist system all the way. Most citizens however that are merely registered as Democrats are not that liberal or left at all I do not believe. That is why I think as they realize the pendulum has swung too far left, they will vote overwhelmingly Republican again in the next election, at least I hope so.

I agree. I posted what I did for several reasons:
It made clear that the underlying philosophies of liberalism are not the same from one country to the next.
It is accessible . . . which may be the most important reason in this context.
It points out that American liberalism avoids socialism.

You are not allowed to add anything, especially not your opinion. That was made abundantly clear. The rules of the game are to use standard definitions.

As someone who has a degree in political science and has been working journalist, I certainly know that there are degrees of liberalism. I also have a better handle on expressing these concepts. Here your ego, which has nothing to support it, comes into play again. You can not control yourself. You have to express your opinions, whether they are shallow or wrong.


You fail to recognize that the Democratic Party is not liberal. There have been attempts made to make it liberal but, for various reasons, those attempts did not succeed.

Thanks for the tip. I will check it out.

I've come upon yet another area in which the internet is totally useless. It is difficult to find decent political writing on line. I typed, "Does liberal mean left in America," and received a link to Amazon's listing of Jonah Goldberg's latest book and to a feature on a politician in Germany.

Excellent post. Historically accurate.

Hitler was neither a political conservative nor a democratic socialist (as opposed to authoritarian Marxists or Communists). What some people object to is the intellectual dishonesty of some conservatives who seize upon the word "Socialist" in the full name of the German Nazi Party -- as if totalitarians would never misuse words (e.g. "People's Democratic Republic") -- so they can score points against liberals. Kuvasz cited historical facts that you have not disproved. (BTW, okie, I'm not a liberal; I have no ideological allegiances anymore.)

Historically evil has originated from both sides of the political spectrum.

Your nom d'email sounds like the call letters of two merged radio stations!

A "flash mob" recently appeared at a Target store:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=iv&v=9FhMMmqzbD8&annotation_id=annotation_352455

Amusing.
Target has been embarrassed by that donation since they made it and has been feverishly trying to back peddle.
I did not agree with the Supreme Court's decision giving corporations and unions equal status with us (individuals) in terms of free speech. But I am not a constitutional lawyer.
Target's misstep will probably cause their ilk to forsake contributing to campaigns. Instead, they will get their lobbyists to do whatever lobbyists do.

A great many people disagree with that SC decision. I think this will be discussed for years to come.