Liberal or Conservative?

[Caleb8844]

If a mod could add a poll to this, I'd love them for the rest of my days

I'm wondering if we could get a basic idea as to where this forum falls on the political spectrum. So, given the words 'Liberal,' and 'Conservative,' which would you find more fitting to describe yourself?

 

[deep]

we tend to range from moderate republicans to tea party supporters

we just want America to be great, agin

 

[Caleb8844]

I always knew you were a closet Tea partier, deep. You were just trying to suppress who you really are. Can't fool me though!

 

[Caleb8844]

Well, I'll start off by saying I'd consider myself a conservative, with serious libertarian leanings.

 

[bono_212]

Why do I have to choose between one or the other?

 

[PhilsFan]

Why do I have to choose between one or the other?

Yeah, this is basically what's wrong with America.

 

[INDY500]

Conservative will win the poll because no one will admit to being a liberal. (Who can blame 'em?)

The 2 actual choices in FYM are reasoned moderate or right-wing extremist.

 

[Canadiens1131]

no one will admit to being a liberal. (Who can blame 'em?)

It's interested how "liberal" has been the victim of a slow, churning, 20+ year campaign to make it a dirty word.

 

[BVS]

Unlabeltarian

 

[Liesje]

Liberal. I'm perfectly OK with the label and don't mind choosing between the two.

 

[maycocksean]

The 2 actual choices in FYM are reasoned moderate or right-wing extremist.

heh, heh.

Good one.

You've been on fire lately, INDY

 

[indra]

Liberal. I'm perfectly OK with the label and don't mind choosing between the two.

Same here.

Conservative will win the poll because no one will admit to being a liberal. (Who can blame 'em?)

Considering what conservative has come to mean in the US, I'd be ashamed to call myself a conservative and can't imagine why anyone would want to call themselves that.

 

[Pearl]

Considering what conservative has come to mean in the US, I'd be ashamed to call myself a conservative and can't imagine why anyone would want to call themselves that.

Because the way they see it, they're moral, Godly and true to the American way. Liberals are amoral, atheist and communists, according my neo-con relatives.

BTW, I consider myself moderate if that's permissible in America these days.

 

[Liesje]

^ then you should probably vote "liberal", these day.....

 

[kramwest1]

I really like to think of myself as 50 percent socialist, 50 percent libertarian.
I generally think the government should be heavily involved in certain things and hands off other things. But, I'll default to Liberal every time because I believe organized society exists to help people, and I trust the government to help people more than churches or corporations. And, I have more control over the government.

I just find it funny that libertarian somehow equals conservative. The only libertarian views I've heard from conservatives involve corporations and free trade.

 

[BonosSaint]

I generally think the government should be heavily involved in certain things and hands off other things. But, I'll default to Liberal every time because I believe organized society exists to help people, and I trust the government to help people more than churches or corporations.

 

[financeguy]

I am an anti-establishment right winger. I wish to dismantle the current power structure and replace it with my own quasi-fascist hegemony.

 

[Irvine511]

pragmatic progressive.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

moderately liberal

 

[Canadiens1131]

I am an anti-establishment right winger. I wish to dismantle the current power structure and replace it with my own quasi-fascist hegemony.

I could get behind this. Will they still come and pick up the rubbish once a week? If they do that than I am for this.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

so liberal it hurts.

 

[LemonMelon]

Notbrainwashedbybullshitpartylinesitarian

 

[Dfit00]

I am not american and politics is for the weak.

 

[LPU2]

It's interested how "liberal" has been the victim of a slow, churning, 20+ year campaign to make it a dirty word.

Yep. It was actually a brilliantly effective campaign. As much as I feel bad for the people who were taken in by it, and actually continue to be—because most of them are good people—you have to admit that it was damned brilliant.

Start by demonizing the very word "liberal," then convince your audience that all of the people they already mistrusted... elitist, latté-drinking city dwellers, Hollywood multi-culturalists, know-it-all teachers and college professors...are "liberals" trying to destroy "real" America...and you've basically got them, hook, line and sinker. They'll even vote against their own best interest at this point.

The only thing remaining is to ensure that the information they get outside of your influence can't be trusted. And so the "liberal media" is born. The Iraq war is going badly? It's not!! That's just the "liberal media." Now you've got them for life. It's foolproof.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Yep. It was actually a brilliantly effective campaign. As much as I feel bad for the people who were taken in by it, and actually continue to be—because most of them are good people—you have to admit that it was damned brilliant.

Start by demonizing the very word "liberal," then convince your audience that all of the people they already mistrusted... elitist, latté-drinking city dwellers, Hollywood multi-culturalists, know-it-all teachers and college professors...are "liberals" trying to destroy "real" America...and you've basically got them, hook, line and sinker. They'll even vote against their own best interest at this point.

The only thing remaining is to ensure that the information they get outside of your influence can't be trusted. And so the "liberal media" is born. The Iraq war is going badly? It's not!! That's just the "liberal media." Now you've got them for life. It's foolproof.

It's strange...I agree with some (fairly traditional) Republican beliefs such as a general need for limited government, letting states decide on most issues, and fiscal responsibility. I swing a bit more libertarian (Ron Paulish in only this matter) in my views on intervention in foreign affairs and defense spending. Basically protect U.S. shores and interests, but stop throwing the troops into bloody conflicts in far away places to protect our buddies and energy interests.

It's also just the rampant anti-intellectualism and hypocrisy coming from the political mis/disinformation ministry of the RNC that bugs me. I don't see how anyone who is not voting on social issues could honestly vote FOR Republican candidates in a presidential election these days. It just seems like most registered Republicans I talk to are voting AGAINST some kind of quasi-socialist uprising from the left. The general voting public should do some reading up on what Socialism is, and then what Social Democracy is. But of course they won't.

There is a fundamental problem not only with the GOP, but American politics in general when we are actually sacrificing/demonizing teacher's salaries and students' futures but not taking drastic action to reduce defense spending.

Also can I just post one last thing in this rant.

American high-income earners
DO NOT create jobs.

DEMAND creates jobs.

If the middle and poor classes are not in good shape and are not spending, there is NO DEMAND.

Enjoy those tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners, and then watch as they turn around and go hire a bunch of Chinese people to make your fucking 79.99$ Wal-Mart BBQs.

Economics 101, but it doesn't suit the GOP's fav tax brackets, so you get fed bullshit. Instead of retraining and investing in our poor and middle classes so they can compete globally in an information-based economy, we are worrying that José and Juan are picking fruit and washing dishes and taking those glorious, high-skill, information-based work away from hard working Americans.

What the fuck, guys....seriously?

 

[INDY500]

American high-income earners
DO NOT create jobs.

DEMAND creates jobs.

Who meets that demand? The guy next to you in the unemployment line?

If the middle and poor classes are not in good shape and are not spending, there is NO DEMAND.

Republicanism 101. For that very reason let people keep more of the money they earn for they can spend it more wisely than the government. Encourage saving as well.

Enjoy those tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners, and then watch as they turn around and go hire a bunch of Chinese people to make your fucking 79.99$ Wal-Mart BBQs.

Really, who goes to Wal*Mart for BBQ?

Economics 101, but it doesn't suit the GOP's fav tax brackets, so you get fed bullshit. Instead of retraining and investing in our poor and middle classes so they can compete globally in an information-based economy, we are worrying that José and Juan are picking fruit and washing dishes and taking those glorious, high-skill, information-based work away from hard working Americans.

What the fuck, guys....seriously?

Well, there are a couple of nice little experiments in economics currently taking place. Barack Obama's Keynesian stimulus and increased health care and Wall St regulation recovery vs. the tax and regulation cutting/tight monetary policy recovery of Ronald Reagan in the 80's.

And if you don't care for that one you can look at which states are providing the jobs in the current recession. The high tax states or the low tax states. Hint, one state with no state income tax is creating half the new jobs.

 

[BVS]

And if you don't care for that one you can look at which states are providing the jobs in the current recession. The high tax states or the low tax states. Hint, one state with no state income tax is creating half the new jobs.

Are you speaking about the state in which the hypocrite in charge used stimulus money to balance the state's budget?

 

[U2DMfan]

Who meets that demand? The guy next to you in the unemployment line?


Republicanism 101. For that very reason let people keep more of the money they earn for they can spend it more wisely than the government. Encourage saving as well.

Obviously business fat cats would play a huge role in meeting that demand.
But it needs to be there first.

And your Republicanism 101 is distorted w/r/t objective truth. Although the way you've spun it is a perfect demonstration of exactly why it is effective. It has worked on someone like you, who seems pretty intelligent otherwise.

The true credo is "let businesses keep more of the money they earn for they can spend it more wisely than the government". It is playing the "we are looking out for you, working class America...while looking out for big corporate donors" Reaganism. And why moderates like me (conservative on many issues, fiscal, national defense) wouldn't vote Republican if you paid me. In other words, I am a 'Reagan Democrat' (in that sense) that isn't fooled. Or a Clintonian...although I reject both corporate parties whole-heartedly. I am a social liberal, civil libertarian that is fiscally conservative and a hawk.

Nobody is talking about taxing the middle class and poor at a higher rate. It is all an argument about taxes on the rich. But the fear generated by political rhetoric by the Republican party works...because they're good at it.

Otherwise, on most fiscal matters - I would guess we would agree on a lot of things. I think Obama has been a dramatic failure on the economy. But the idea that Republicans have the 'right idea' is nothing short of ABSURD. Now please, let's all make a distinction between conservative fiscal policy (to varying degrees) and what the Republicans are offering. It's the difference between principles and corporate-sponsored policy.

Reps and Dems alike care about money and power which more often than not, in DC, mean the same thing. I guess my only point is, even to all of you liberals and Dems, etc. Remember not all fiscal conservatives are snowed by the Republican bullshit. It is NOT always the same thing.

 

[INDY500]

Please remember that even President Obama's Debt Commission recommended the following:

Reform and simplify the tax code. The tax code is rife with inefficiencies, loopholes, incentives, tax earmarks, and baffling complexity. We need to lower tax rates, broaden the base, simplify the tax code, and bring down the deficit. We need to reform the corporate tax system to make America the best place to start and grow a business and create jobs.

I believe the purpose of a tax code is to raise revenue for the constitutional functions of the state without stifling economic growth. Not to pick winners or losers (loopholes, subsidizes). Not for income redistribution or "economic justice."

And that is a clear distinction between conservatives and liberals.

For the record, I never said I was against raising tax rates to achieve pre-recession revenues once the economy and joblessness had greatly improved and the federal budget was close to being balanced. With the sole purpose of paying down the national debt. I am against any tax increases to fund further spending recklessness.

 

[LPU2]

It's strange...I agree with some (fairly traditional) Republican beliefs such as a general need for limited government, letting states decide on most issues, and fiscal responsibility. I swing a bit more libertarian (Ron Paulish in only this matter) in my views on intervention in foreign affairs and defense spending. Basically protect U.S. shores and interests, but stop throwing the troops into bloody conflicts in far away places to protect our buddies and energy interests.

It's also just the rampant anti-intellectualism and hypocrisy coming from the political mis/disinformation ministry of the RNC that bugs me. I don't see how anyone who is not voting on social issues could honestly vote FOR Republican candidates in a presidential election these days. It just seems like most registered Republicans I talk to are voting AGAINST some kind of quasi-socialist uprising from the left. The general voting public should do some reading up on what Socialism is, and then what Social Democracy is. But of course they won't.

There is a fundamental problem not only with the GOP, but American politics in general when we are actually sacrificing/demonizing teacher's salaries and students' futures but not taking drastic action to reduce defense spending.

Also can I just post one last thing in this rant.

American high-income earners
DO NOT create jobs.

DEMAND creates jobs.

If the middle and poor classes are not in good shape and are not spending, there is NO DEMAND.

Enjoy those tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners, and then watch as they turn around and go hire a bunch of Chinese people to make your fucking 79.99$ Wal-Mart BBQs.

Economics 101, but it doesn't suit the GOP's fav tax brackets, so you get fed bullshit. Instead of retraining and investing in our poor and middle classes so they can compete globally in an information-based economy, we are worrying that José and Juan are picking fruit and washing dishes and taking those glorious, high-skill, information-based work away from hard working Americans.

What the fuck, guys....seriously?

Well said. I think MOST people would agree with basic republican philosophies like small government, low taxes and states rights. If that's all the republican party was about, they'd win every election. Even I voted for Reagan in '84.

But unfortunately for them, the rest of your post is closer to reality. They've gone completely insane. If they're not death panel morons, birthers, Glen Beckers, homosexuality = beastiality nuts, they're anti-tax crusaders. And it's THESE people that are the worst. Because most of them know better. The social conservatives are just bigoted or ignorant. That's understandable. The left has it's share of those as well. It's these people who still think supply-side economics is the answer that drive me crazy.

Ideology over country. Ideology over ALL. They more worship Ayn Rand and Grover Norquist than they do any semblence of what Christ taught. Of course the bulk of their base is so convinced Jesus loves them for their above social stances, that they haven't noticed the wool descending over their eyes on economic issues.

It's this foolish and consistent adherence to repeatedly disproven economic theory (supply-side, deregulation, market infallibility) that caused the Great Recession. And if they stay on their current path with the debt limit, it will cause another.

Of COURSE demand creates jobs. Does supply create jobs? Yes, of course. But putting money on the demand side is far, far more efficient. Every economist who isn't imprisoned by his political ideology knows this.