What should liberals do?

[whiskeybravo]

First,I find it interesting that the original post made the assumption that most readers here are "Liberal and Intelligent" as if those qualities are somehow joined at the hip. Nevertheless, I don't see anyone jumping up to scream "I am NOT intelligent!" but there do seem to be a fair number wo certainly do not consider themselves politically liberal.

I digress. The issue is actually quite simple IMHO. When society is fat, dumb and happy, such as it was following the Reagan years, The sheep in the population begin to feel guilty about issues close to a liberal's heart. Homelessness, hunger, environment, etc. This is when the liberals have the opportunity to push their agenda. Conversely, when things start to get tough and leadership is needed, almost universally the public concious swings to the conservative side.

Of course there are exceptions to this, and each positions strengths and weeknesses have changed with history, but it is generally true.

Why? Look at principals. What is the foundation of the classic "Liberal" platform? Social equity. What does this have to do with prosperity or security? Nothing, it is a feel-good foundation. On the other hand, the classic "Conservative" foundation is keep your hands out of my pockets, and hold people responsible for their OWN actions. When they are about to lay people off where you work, are you more concerned that they might cut someone who has economic hardships, or YOU?

Whiskeybravo - a lousy stinking conservative republican who clearly hates trees, likes dirty water, and kicks homeless people for fun.

Damn, posted in the wrong place. Since I'm a dumb republican, can someone tell me how to move it?

[jefhatfield]

it's ok ;)

when a post gets in the wrong place, it takes a life of its own since a thread too long gets too much history behind it and new posters don't know how to jump in

what you mention above is normal american politics, back and forth and these years are the conservative years...at least unless W can't turn things around, then it will swing back the other way quickly

i see bush as a one term president most likely and while i don't think he will get re-elected, he won't be hated either

now that he has the senate and the house, he doesn't have them in such a large enough percentage to get anything done so any failings of his policies will be put on his shoulders, and not the government as a whole

clinton had the advantage of coming in strong as where bush came in during a contested election and never had the will of the people solidly behind him

reagan also had a strong momentum coming in during 1981 and that helped him get re-elected, too

if w gets re-elected, he would have pulled off a political miracle imho and if he ends up a legendary two term president, he will shut up even the naysayers within his own party

even w's family groomed jeb for the white house job and the few times i have seen jeb on television, he certainly has a charisma his brother lacks

[mcrain]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
even w's family groomed jeb for the white house job and the few times i have seen jeb on television, he certainly has a charisma his brother lacks

Even if I was a Republican, I'd be a little weirded out about the idea of three presidents coming from one family.

[Chisholm]

Originally posted by mcrain


Even if I was a Republican, I'd be a little weirded out about the idea of three presidents coming from one family.

It seems kinda' icky to me. Not really incest, but just gross government.:p

cheers!

[macktheknife]

Originally posted by whiskeybravo
Why? Look at principals. What is the foundation of the classic "Liberal" platform? Social equity. What does this have to do with prosperity or security? Nothing, it is a feel-good foundation. On the other hand, the classic "Conservative" foundation is keep your hands out of my pockets, and hold people responsible for their OWN actions. When they are about to lay people off where you work, are you more concerned that they might cut someone who has economic hardships, or YOU?

Remember that true Classical Liberalism derives its ideas from the Enlightenment, where many philosophers like John Locke, Rene Rousseau, and Adam Smith called for liberty for the individual--free from governmental constraints. The Conservatives like Edmund Burke actually wanted more governmental intervention to protect the current social order.

This division was turned on its head when FDR campaigned as a liberal and sweept into power in the 30s calling for greater government intervention.

[Sun Baked]

Another political thread, another pounding headache ...

http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?postid=158599

[whiskeybravo]

Originally posted by macktheknife


Remember that true Classical Liberalism derives its ideas from the Enlightenment, where many philosophers like John Locke, Rene Rousseau, and Adam Smith called for liberty for the individual--free from governmental constraints. The Conservatives like Edmund Burke actually wanted more governmental intervention to protect the current social order.

This division was turned on its head when FDR campaigned as a liberal and sweept into power in the 30s calling for greater government intervention.

Absolutely. That was the point I tried to make about political directions changing. Of course it applies to social directions as well. The terms conservative and liberal are only valid in the context of time.

[job]

Originally posted by whiskeybravo
The terms conservative and liberal are only valid in the context of time.

Exactly.

What was "liberal" years ago is "conservative" today.

[wdlove]

Want to see them promote Nancy Polosi et al.

[cubist]

Learn to think.