In search of the Liberal mindset

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: flawlssdistortn

Originally posted by: dgevert
I read through this discussion, and amongst all the conservatives attacking their straw men of the liberal mindset, I am reminded of one eternal fact, that has been true for as long as politics have been around:

Conservatives are morons.

Look son, by coming out with a statement like that, you lose all credibility and just become another straw man.

In which case it sounds like you don't know what a straw man *is.*

 

[PatboyX]

i think both parties have changed a lot since the decades you mention. neither one is nearly as pristine as the members would like you to believe. but to call democrats sell-outs is pretty hilarious, considering.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: dgevert
I read through this discussion, and amongst all the conservatives attacking their straw men of the liberal mindset, I am reminded of one eternal fact, that has been true for as long as politics have been around:

Conservatives are morons.

I think CWJerome had a whole other excellent post addressing this mentality

 

[slash196]

I only read the first post, so forgive me if this has already been addressed. Today's liberals haven't given up on the social reforms of the 30s, 40s and 50s. We won. We've simply moved on to other issues.

And the colloquialism you're searching for is, "The jig is up". "The gig is up" makes no sense.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: cwjerome

if 60,000 votes wouldve went the other way in ohio you would look like a jackass posting this.

Nah, it'll take more than a presidential win. It's about policies, and a general political shift.

I am fully aware of the enemy. It sits in two places. One which would attack us from without, and one which would use fear to snatch freedom and hard fought for rights.

Right, but I do place a lot of faith in our political mechanism and the people. The external threat is usually a very different animal. The threats within are rarely the conspiratorial evil that some make believe... it's usually general ignorance and random selfishness that we can keep tabs on.

Actually, his post makes your point for you. Notice his complete and total inability to see beyond a single election.

I note failure to see trouble in the making and the inability to see beyond the significance of a single election.

People I have supported have sometimes won, and sometimes lost. It has never been a real issue to me. Issues themselves matter.

There are fundamental changes happening. I keep referring to the matter of the desire of this administration to hold citizens without charge, trial or legal representation. Perhaps that detail is not troublesome to you, but I find it disturbing. Perhaps you will one day practice law, and these trivialities may matter. Maybe not?

Perhaps this evil trend will reverse itself in the next election, but undoing damage is not always easy.

Actuially, I do practice law, and I do find some recent events troubling. I also know, from our own history. that we have had some troubling laws and almost every Attorney General has done troubling things to citizens. Reno had the blood from Ruby Ridge and Waco on her hands, if you'll recall. Ashcroft will be remembered for abuses under the new PATRIOT Act.

I take solace in the fact that the court system will protect our civil liberties. I don't trust any elected officials to protect my freedom. You should not either.

Having said that, this post is little more than a clever diversion from the argument at hand. Liberals have become unable to see the big picture. In the last election cycle, countles commentators cited the left's lack of "vision."

The old school libs had vision. A purpose. A grand vision for America.

They lost. Now they just squabble over issues. A lot of noise and splashing... about relatively small things. There is no grand vision. Nothing to sustain the party.

Ronald Reagan was a man of vision. Newt Gingrich, like him or hate him, gave the Right a vision.

Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate


Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

Michael Moore?

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate


Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

Michael Moore?

... a vision, edited for maximum entertainment value, bereft of actual substance, with complete disregard for the truth.

Sounds about right.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

The only vision they've had lately has been through Rose Colored Glasses. Of course the Current Administrations Visions seem to have been the biblical type and are usually viewed through squinty beady eyes.

 

[cwjerome]

And the colloquialism you're searching for is, "The jig is up". "The gig is up" makes no sense.

Hmmm, just a PC moment (and it does make sense, it's like saying the show (gig) is over)...

Picky picky

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

And the colloquialism you're searching for is, "The jig is up". "The gig is up" makes no sense.

Hmmm, just a PC moment (and it does make sense, it's like saying the show (gig) is over)...

Picky picky

P&N is nothing without its petty bitchiness.

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate


Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

Michael Moore?

... a vision, edited for maximum entertainment value, bereft of actual substance, with complete disregard for the truth.

Sounds about right.

Moore is better than any of the pundits the Right has:

Ann Coulter? Bigoted bitch...
Rush Limbaugh? Lying fat guy...
Bill O'Reilly? Lying weasel...

Complete disregard for the truth is a trait more commonly found in conservatives, as evidenced by the following occurrences and trends:

Religious Right's views on evolution/creation debate
Religious Right's views on church-state separation
Religious Right's views on abortion
Religious Right's views on the war in Iraq
Religious Right's views on taxation

Hell, I can't think of anything the Religious Right has been *right* and *honest* about! If a conservative told me tomorrow that the sky was blue, I'd go outside and double-check.

 

[dannybin1742]

really don't what to read the entire thread,

but here is my "liberal mind set"

1)help the less fortunate, the wealthy can afford to give a portion of their income to do this, and it can be through SS, WElfare, state sponsored healthcare (the money is like manure annecdote)

2)the military industrial complex that ike warned us about needs to be put in check

3)fiscal responsibility, needs to be upheld

4)education needs to be funnded better, this include college level tuition, i feel it should be subsidized, this in turn would increase the number of people who will have a better ability to find a job

5) all elections should be state sponsored, that way no one can buy legislation or legislators, that way ideas and performance will begin to win instead of who has the most money

6) limits should be set on 527s in terms of how much money they can raise based on their membership numbers (basically fundraising caps based on numbers of people who are part of the 527)

7)bring real credibility back to government

8) seperation of church and state!

9) extremely stringent ethical code of conduct for senate and house members, with severe punishment for breaking them

10) larger grants for research at colleges and corporation- as long as they make all data from the research publically avaliable

11)prohibit companies from owning more than one source of media (paper, tv, radio)

12)federal healthcare for everyone (a healthy population is working population), there will be conditions to receive this though*****

i'm sure there are more, but these are the ones i can think of

things i acknowledge

there will always be loopholes in laws
there will always be some level of corruption
there will always be some level of beaurocracy
there will always be a right and left

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Who, in recent memory, gave the left vision?

Howard Dean gave it a good try. Barak Obama is on the way now, too.

BTW, you mentioned Newt Gingrich. It was Newt Gingrich who admitted on Meet The Press that, essentially, the Republican Party had become what they despised in the Democratic Party when they took over the Congress in the 90s.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Somewhere along the line, things changed. I'm fascinated by the endless string of editorials and links from the left-wing google-mongers here, because the attitude of today's liberal seems vastly different than the attitude of yesterday's liberal wingnuts from the 30s, 40s, and 50s. I guess the only way for them to become a power in the marketplace of ideas was to sell out. That worked for a while... but it's becoming painfully obvious that the gig is up because they have no ideological base to stand on. (Hence the political decline of liberalism in the past 10-20 years).

Whereas the crusading spirit that advocated a planned society, and talking in terms of abstract principles, theories, and noble ends was the norm, today modern leftists concern themselves with single, concrete-bound, range-of-the-moment projects and demands without regard to the larger context, costs, or consequences. Notice the same hardened Libs continuously posting links that supposedly "prove a point"... but that's the problem. They're all pragmatic, extremely narrow evaluations of a singular situation. "Bagdad Police Chief Killed" and So-and-So lectures Bush" etc....

Such a strategy may win a few brownie points here-and-there with some people. But what is never developed is the old-fashioned ideological framework. This is the Catch-22 the Left is in today. They can abandon the broad social reforms of their predessesors (because most people will reject the philosophical foundation outright), but eventually their asymmetrical strategy to "smuggle" this society into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting the whole of these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or their underlying base to be exposed crumbles and fails... just as their political influence has deteriorated recently.

They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and it's almost sad to see them spinning their wheels so furiously in a dead-end road to nowhere. They went from getting their idealistic machinations skewered 50 years ago, to a guerilla campaign of pragmaticism that saw their polices fall short and be rejected today. So much failure, no wonder they tend to be neurotic types

Basically, they are doomed to repeat their past frustrations and will continue to collapse. During the cold war, they proclaimed their love for mankind while being bored by the rivers of blood pouring from the Soviet Union and China. Ranging from intellectual evasion to glowing tribute towards Communists, they pointed their little barbs at the US for reasons of "injustice," "exploitation," "repression," and "persecution." Today, they are no different. They pour out range-of-the-moment, pragmatitic arguments (as evidenced here on P&N) against the USA, while generally remaining silent -and in most ways oblivious to- the nature of our enemy. The more things change, the more things stay the same... once again doomed to be on the wrong side of history.

And it seems to me you can't see the forest because of the trees. SO WHAT??? The "liberals" of 50 years ago aren't the same people as today. News flash, the "conservatives" have changed significantly also.

 

[Vic]

There is NO true ideological difference between liberals and conservatives in modern America, nor between Democrats and Republicans. NONE. They are simply 2 different political organizations vying for control of the US government and over the American people. At the core, their only true ideology is the acquistion and maintenance of power. Nothing more. Anyone who believes any differently is simply fooling themselves.
And because their political platforms are based upon the premise of attracting as many people as possible to their respective political banners, they are filled with numerous contradictions and conflicting ideologies that no one sane person could possibly believe in all of it.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic
There is NO true ideological difference between liberals and conservatives in modern America, nor between Democrats and Republicans. NONE. They are simply 2 different political organizations vying for control of the US government and over the American people. At the core, their only true ideology is the acquistion and maintenance of power. Nothing more. Anyone who believes any differently is simply fooling themselves.
And because their political platforms are based upon the premise of attracting as many people as possible to their respective political banners, they are filled with numerous contradictions and conflicting ideologies that no one sane person could possibly believe in all of it.

And in order to maintain that power, they spend copious amounts of time performing fund-raising activities and taking money from special interests.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Vic
There is NO true ideological difference between liberals and conservatives in modern America, nor between Democrats and Republicans. NONE. They are simply 2 different political organizations vying for control of the US government and over the American people. At the core, their only true ideology is the acquistion and maintenance of power. Nothing more. Anyone who believes any differently is simply fooling themselves.
And because their political platforms are based upon the premise of attracting as many people as possible to their respective political banners, they are filled with numerous contradictions and conflicting ideologies that no one sane person could possibly believe in all of it.

While you may have an argument about Rep vs Dem -the ideological differences between Liberal and Conservative are still there. Sure, there is plenty of interweaving that happens with ideas and such but there are still fundamental differences at the roots. Are they polar opposites? no, not really but to say there are no ideological differences between the ideologies is simply untrue.

CsG

 

[1EZduzit]

It always gives me a chuckle to see one ideology try to define the other. They can't even define themselves let alone the inner working/procceses of the other side.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Zedtom

The attitude of, "I'm right, and you're an idiot" is pure Rush Limbaugh.

funny how thats how about 95% of people sound in this forum. :roll:

Yeah, and you're included in that 95%

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
While you may have an argument about Rep vs Dem -the ideological differences between Liberal and Conservative are still there. Sure, there is plenty of interweaving that happens with ideas and such but there are still fundamental differences at the roots. Are they polar opposites? no, not really but to say there are no ideological differences between the ideologies is simply untrue.

CsG

Really? I suppose that's why the Republican Bush Adminstration will make no attempt to abandon socialist Democratic agendas like Social Security, Medicare, and Welfare, even though the Republicans complain that such programs are burdensome to the taxpayer and anathema to the conservative ideal? I suppose that's why the Bush Admin pushed through the largest socialized healthcare bill ever passed in America with the Medicare Reform Act of 2003?

Would you, as a conservative, support the dismantling of Social Security and Medicare even if you knew that those programs were a close family member's only means of income and healthcare? Of course not.

Why? Because the "conservative ideal" has absolutely nothing to do with freedom or being free from the US government. In fact, it all stems from the political philosophies of robber barons, miners, ranchers, and farmers back in the late 1800's, when the government had land and resources to give away and bought influence thereby. The best way I've ever heard the conservative ideal phrased is "Leave me alone, but keep sending me money." Open up the publicly-owned lands at ANWR for oil drilling at pennies on the dollar. Have the Forest Service continue to lose $200 million+ per year so that private corporations can continue to log public lands for next to nothing. Keep the farm and corporate subsidies coming, it's only that evil welfare when you give to the needy! Military pay getting too low? Start a war!
Fiscal conservatism? Balance the budget? Not if it gets in the way of those checks! Screw the children who will have to pay for it, we distrust and hate them, which is why we make a crime any act they might do that we simply disapprove of.

That is modern American "conservatism". And socialism by any other name is still socialism. The government controls it and unwilling taxpayers are forced to pay for it (whether today's taxpayers or tomorrow's). It's all the same damned thing.


edit: Oops! Does this make me an evil "liberal" because I dared to speak the truth about your glorious ideal? Tough sh!t, I can't stand them either. 2 sides of the same coin...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
While you may have an argument about Rep vs Dem -the ideological differences between Liberal and Conservative are still there. Sure, there is plenty of interweaving that happens with ideas and such but there are still fundamental differences at the roots. Are they polar opposites? no, not really but to say there are no ideological differences between the ideologies is simply untrue.

CsG

Really? I suppose that's why the Republican Bush Adminstration will make no attempt to abandon socialist Democratic agendas like Social Security, Medicare, and Welfare, even though the Republicans complain that such programs are burdensome to the taxpayer and anathema to the conservative ideal? I suppose that's why the Bush Admin pushed through the largest socialized healthcare bill ever passed in America with the Medicare Reform Act of 2003?

Would you, as a conservative, support the dismantling of Social Security and Medicare even if you knew that those programs were a close family member's only means of income and healthcare? Of course not.

Why? Because the "conservative ideal" has absolutely nothing to do with freedom or being free from the US government. In fact, it all stems from the political philosophies of robber barons, miners, ranchers, and farmers back in the late 1800's, when the government had land and resources to give away and bought influence thereby. The best way I've ever heard the conservative ideal phrased is "Leave me alone, but keep sending me money." Open up the publicly-owned lands at ANWR for oil drilling at pennies on the dollar. Have the Forest Service continue to lose $200 million+ per year so that private corporations can continue to log public lands for next to nothing. Keep the farm and corporate subsidies coming, it's only that evil welfare when you give to the needy! Military pay getting too low? Start a war!
Fiscal conservatism? Balance the budget? Not if it gets in the way of those checks! Screw the children who will have to pay for it, we distrust and hate them, which is why we make a crime any act they might do that we simply disapprove of.

That is modern American "conservatism". And socialism by any other name is still socialism. The government controls it and unwilling taxpayers are forced to pay for it (whether today's taxpayers or tomorrow's). It's all the same damned thing.


edit: Oops! Does this make me an evil "liberal" because I dared to speak the truth about your glorious ideal? Tough sh!t, I can't stand them either. 2 sides of the same coin...

Again, you can't seem to separate political parties from Ideologies. Just because you don't want to see the differences doesn't mean they aren't there. They aren't polar opposites as I said but the ideologies are quite different. Once you start in with gov't policies - the water gets muddy because you bring in political parties which don't alway match the ideologies most closely identified with each.

CsG

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
While you may have an argument about Rep vs Dem -the ideological differences between Liberal and Conservative are still there. Sure, there is plenty of interweaving that happens with ideas and such but there are still fundamental differences at the roots. Are they polar opposites? no, not really but to say there are no ideological differences between the ideologies is simply untrue.

CsG

Really? I suppose that's why the Republican Bush Adminstration will make no attempt to abandon socialist Democratic agendas like Social Security, Medicare, and Welfare, even though the Republicans complain that such programs are burdensome to the taxpayer and anathema to the conservative ideal? I suppose that's why the Bush Admin pushed through the largest socialized healthcare bill ever passed in America with the Medicare Reform Act of 2003?

Would you, as a conservative, support the dismantling of Social Security and Medicare even if you knew that those programs were a close family member's only means of income and healthcare? Of course not.

Why? Because the "conservative ideal" has absolutely nothing to do with freedom or being free from the US government. In fact, it all stems from the political philosophies of robber barons, miners, ranchers, and farmers back in the late 1800's, when the government had land and resources to give away and bought influence thereby. The best way I've ever heard the conservative ideal phrased is "Leave me alone, but keep sending me money." Open up the publicly-owned lands at ANWR for oil drilling at pennies on the dollar. Have the Forest Service continue to lose $200 million+ per year so that private corporations can continue to log public lands for next to nothing. Keep the farm and corporate subsidies coming, it's only that evil welfare when you give to the needy! Military pay getting too low? Start a war!
Fiscal conservatism? Balance the budget? Not if it gets in the way of those checks! Screw the children who will have to pay for it, we distrust and hate them, which is why we make a crime any act they might do that we simply disapprove of.

That is modern American "conservatism". And socialism by any other name is still socialism. The government controls it and unwilling taxpayers are forced to pay for it (whether today's taxpayers or tomorrow's). It's all the same damned thing.


edit: Oops! Does this make me an evil "liberal" because I dared to speak the truth about your glorious ideal? Tough sh!t, I can't stand them either. 2 sides of the same coin...

Bottom line Vic, is that the Republican Party did an excellent job at becoming Democrat clones (minus Trickle down Economics which is a farce) and making the Democratic party irrelavent.

The U.S. really only has a One Party (Rich Boys Club) system with just swings of who is in charge of the Clubhouse at the moment.

It's really sad to see the once powerful Democracy shredded and destroyed by greed & power itself.

Being the Tail end of the Baby Boomer Generation after WWII, I never dreamed to be witnessing another Fall Of Rome and actually not much different from the Hitler Regime either just without the Ethnic Genocide.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Being the Tail end of the Baby Boomer Generation after WWII, I never dreamed to be witnessing another Fall Of Rome and actually not much different from the Hitler Regime either just without the Ethnic Genocide.

You're going to be in for a long wait, like a couple hundred years...

 

[piasabird]

First of all let me say I do not consider myself a liberal or that much of a moderate.

I have been mildly interested in politics since the late 70's, and I have noticed a trend. It seems the democratic party has steadily started leaning and giving more heed to the ultra liberal extremests. Somehow the wacky Ultra Liberals are running the show. I feel this may have alienated a lot of what once could have been described as the mainstream Democratic Base. It seems many people feel a need to alienate many of the bible belt and christian base that kept the Democratic Party centered in reality and common sense. Whithout this core the Democratic Party has become an Ultra-Liberal-Only club that many people may feel ashamed to claim they belong to it.

You may disaggree with my outside look at the Democratic Party. I am like an outsider looking in and it bothers me what I see. Where is the Christian Ideal that helping the needy is what is most important? How did Abortion become the most important goal of the Democratic Party? When Newt Gingridge ? Spell Led the Republican Party he urged that the Republican Party run an Anti-Clinton Campaign and he failed miserably. The Republicans learned from this failure; However, the Democrats tried to do the same thing and failed. The Democrats did not pay attention to what happend in the previous election and went out to prove for themselves that it would not work for themselves. It is the leadership in the Democratic Party that is flawed. The Democrats could not present any positive message or a reason to follow their leadership and they lost the election.

The American people can no longer be led by fear mongering. This is because of the better availability of information on the cable networks and the free press on the Internet. It is harder to preach the same old phoney lies of the democratic party. Republicans do not want to starve your grandmother, take away social security, or poisin the water and the air. Most Americans are not so stupid to beleive these lies, but some Democrats have not learned this.

 

[bamacre]

The Democratic party has become impotent. There is a true lack of leaders coming out of the DNC. Kery couldn't beat a guy who tortured our economy, increased our deficit to numbers only NASA can calculate, and invaded a country that never attacked us for reasons that turned out to be complete lies.

After 9/11, it will be at least 50 years until someone with a name like"Barak Obama" could get into the White House.

I truelly believe that if the Democratic party will ever succeed again, if they ever want to beat the Christian Right, they need to be the party of the Right Christians.