Posted on 02/23/2010 4:10:06 AM PST by look.a.liberal
I came here to understand the conservative point of view. I've lurked for a while now. I decided it'd be appropriate for me to say a few words.
I think that you are patriotic Americans. I am a patriotic American too. It is our right and duty as Americans to vehemently disagree with eachother about how this nation should be governed. It is also our right to call into question the patriotism of those with whom we disagree, but it is our duty not to. It was patriotic to protest the government four years ago, and it is patriotic now. I thank you for this patriotism.
Here are some of the things that I believe:
I support the constitution. I support second amendment rights as well as first amendment rights. I think that it is necessary and good that a court interpret these amendments, but I am as appalled by the notion of a free speech zone as I was by DC's handgun ban. I'm angry about the recent encroachment against the fourth amendment, and the steady erosion of the tenth. It affects blue states as much as red ones. I don't care for drugs, but you tell me how the interstate commerce clause empowers the federal government to keep my neighbor from growing and then smoking a plant without leaving his back yard.
There is little doubt that the federal government exercises more power than it is allowed by the constitution. On the other hand, I think that the infrastructure of a modern country demands more federal powers than are described in the constitution. Instead of amending the constitution, we allowed more and more powers to be read into it. Now it's a status quo that we can't easily abandon.
I support abortion rights, but I think that the opposite position is also very reasonable. If abortion is murder, then there is no question that it should be banned at the federal level. If abortion is simply a medical procedure, then it is tyranny for the government to forbid it. Either way, it would seem that the question should be decided on the federal level. Yet, if we can't reach a consensus about something as basic as whether abortion is murder or an operation, how can we choose to forbid or protect it? I think abortion is a federal-level question that for the moment must unfortunately be decided at the state level.
I am a liberal. I don't think Obama is more tyrannical or arrogant than past presidents. I think a government health-care option would be good for Americans. I don't care that Bush wasn't eloquent, and I also don't think that intellect in the narrow sense is the most important quality for a president. On the other hand I think that the Iraq war was a catastrophic mistake that America won't live down in my lifetime. It weakened America financially, diplomatically and militarily. So, I am very much a liberal. Still, I think we have some common ground.
I'd like to say something a bit more personal. I'm an academic. We spend a lot of our lives thinking about very abstract, technical things. This makes academics prone to elaboration and understatement in our area of expertise, and simultaneously to oversimplification and overconfidence outside of it. We can be short on common sense, but we can have counterinuitive insight in technical matters. It takes academics, entrepreneurs, and factory workers to make a plane fly, and it takes all of us to make the right decisions for America. I think that anti-intellectualism marginalizes an important part of American society, and I think it's destructive. To those who say that small businessmen have nothing of value to say about the US economy, I say you're wrong, and to those who say that academic economists have nothing to say about the US economy, I also say you're wrong.
Please leave comments if you'd like. I'll try to respond tomorrow.
We, Americans, conservative and liberal, need to figure out our own compromises, because our media and our politicians sure as taxes won't do it for us. Like it or not, we're in it together.
“If abortion is murder....”
Please tell me how it can be anything but. At the moment of conception a sperm joins an egg and LIFE BEGINS. There was no life before that moment, only after. If life has begun, to end it is murder. It is really that simple.
“I am a liberal. I don’t think Obama is more tyrannical or arrogant than past presidents.”
With his failed socialist policies [to wit: “medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism.” Vladimir Lenin], his radical associations with avowed communists, Mao adorers, etc., racists and radical Marxist liberation theologians, Obama and his allies have PROVEN themselves more arrogant than past administrations - who at least ostensibly governed at the consent of the people.
“We, Americans, conservative and liberal, need to figure out our own compromises, because our media and our politicians sure as taxes won’t do it for us. Like it or not, we’re in it together.”
Yes, we’re in it together. We need principled leadership, that allows Freedom and Liberty to reign, under God. Such humility of leadership is found within the Conservative movement, within the Tea Party movement, imho, and even there it is too rare.
Both parties are corrupt. The Democrat party is hopelessly corrupted and promotes socialism. The GOP desperately needs reformation - to which we give daily attention.
“At the moment of conception a sperm joins an egg and LIFE BEGINS.”
And distinctly and utterly HUMAN life at that!
But if a "doctor" does it, it's fine with the libs. Hence my comment about hypocrisy.
We already have them, for some Americans. They're called VA hospitals... and they are universally some of the most dank, dark, depressing, low-quality, and high-mortality rate places you'll find. If you've never had a veteran in your family with health problems, just drive to your nearest VA hospital and walk down the halls for 2 minutes. Then go to the nearest non-VA hospital. Odds are that you'll see an immense difference.
Trust me on this. You do NOT want VA-quality hospitals for ALL Americans! Heck, I don't want them for our vets!!
Life begins at conception, and ends at death.
At no point in that cycle is a life any more or any less important or valuable than at any other point.
Liberals want to assign priorities. That’s not acceptable.
popcorn
So you believe that those who oppose Obama's policies are "anti-intellectual"?!? ROFLMBO!!
It's really pretty simple. You cannot spend your way out of money troubles. You cannot enahnce liberty by giving control to government. You cannot stimulate business via taxation. You cannot arrest and try the enemy in wartime. You cannot create permanent jobs with tax money. You cannot talk despots into giving up their delusions of violent grandeur.
If those counter to the "intellectual" position, then some people need to re-check their credentials.
Yeah that is how the Germans felt about the Jews too.
Tell me, what else can it be but murder? What is a fetus but an unborn human? If we have the right to destroy its potential, then, what becomes of this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"? That's the beginning of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. What becomes of that right to life enunciated here? If, as this marvelous document states, all men are endowed with the right to life, doesn't than include them in the womb? If not, explain how it doesn't. And since God (I'm assuming you believe in God) has given that fetus to that mother to nurture and protect, isn't that mother obligated from inception to live by God's plan?
How is it possible a caring human can consider it appropriate to end the life of a fetus in the womb, yet decry the murder of an existing human? How can a caring human not understand that by destroying that fetus, it may well be destroying the next Einstein, the next Gandhi, the next Churchill? What right do you, or anyone, have to make that decision?
I ramble on, but you get the drift. We are NOT God. We have no right to deprive anyone from the right to life. You call yourself a liberal. To me that means you support liberal justice to all. How does supporting abortion rights align with that?
Nazi references are emotional, not factual.
Reference denied.
Are you? Liberals are ALL emotionally immature, therefore a liberal (leftist) locates the reason for any unhappiness or failure he (or others) experience to be outside of himself. Does this describe you?
I came here to understand the conservative point of view.
It's not possible for the emotionally immature to understand an adult point of view. For instance, a mature classic liberal (nka a 'conservative') locates the reasons for his unhappiness within.
I've lurked for a while now. I decided it'd be appropriate for me to say a few words. I think that you are patriotic Americans. I am a patriotic American too. It is our right and duty as Americans to vehemently disagree with each other about how this nation should be governed. It is also our right to call into question the patriotism of those with whom we disagree, but it is our duty not to. It was patriotic to protest the government four years ago, and it is patriotic now. I thank you for this patriotism.
Liberals believe there is nothing special or exceptional about the United States -- unless it is exceptionally bad. Beliefs like that make it impossible for them to truly be "patriotic Americans". Do you believe in American exceptionalism?
Here are some of the things that I believe:
I support the constitution. I support second amendment rights as well as first amendment rights. I think that it is necessary and good that a court interpret these amendments, but I am as appalled by the notion of a free speech zone as I was by DC's handgun ban. I'm angry about the recent encroachment against the fourth amendment, and the steady erosion of the tenth. It affects blue states as much as red ones. I don't care for drugs, but you tell me how the interstate commerce clause empowers the federal government to keep my neighbor from growing and then smoking a plant without leaving his back yard.
There is little doubt that the federal government exercises more power than it is allowed by the constitution. On the other hand, I think that the infrastructure of a modern country demands more federal powers than are described in the constitution. Instead of amending the constitution, we allowed more and more powers to be read into it. Now it's a status quo that we can't easily abandon.
I support abortion rights, but I think that the opposite position is also very reasonable. If abortion is murder, then there is no question that it should be banned at the federal level. If abortion is simply a medical procedure, then it is tyranny for the government to forbid it. Either way, it would seem that the question should be decided on the federal level. Yet, if we can't reach a consensus about something as basic as whether abortion is murder or an operation, how can we choose to forbid or protect it? I think abortion is a federal-level question that for the moment must unfortunately be decided at the state level.
Liberal/leftist/REgressives (who call themselves 'PROgressives') believe rights aren't 'self-evident', but are given to us by men and can be taken away by "consensus".
Mature classic liberals (nka 'conservatives') like our Framers, hold a biblical worldview and believe that our rights are self-evident and are unalienable because they are given to us by God. (See the Declaration of Independence). They put our Constitution in place, undergirded by an impartial Rule of Law, to guard those rights. (It is a meaningless document otherwise).
The bigger the government the smaller the citizen. ~ Dennis Prager
Liberty -- understood in its spiritual sense -- was the key idea of the Founders. This cannot be overemphasized. According to Michael Novak, liberty was understood as the 'axis of the universe,' and history as 'the drama of human liberty.' Thomas Jefferson wrote that 'the God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time.' It was for this reason that Jefferson's original idea for the design of the seal of the United States was Moses leading the children of Israel out of the death-cult of Egypt, out of the horizontal wasteland of spiritual bondage, into the open circle of a higher life. America was quite consciously conceived as an opportunity to 're-launch' mankind.
In light of the foregoing, when a leftist/liberal says he "supports the Constitution", mature conservatives (classic liberals) know how tenuous that support is and would never vote to put such an unstable mentality into high office.
I am a liberal. I don't think Obama is more tyrannical or arrogant than past presidents. I think a government health-care option would be good for Americans. I don't care that Bush wasn't eloquent, and I also don't think that intellect in the narrow sense is the most important quality for a president. On the other hand I think that the Iraq war was a catastrophic mistake that America won't live down in my lifetime. It weakened America financially, diplomatically and militarily. So, I am very much a liberal.
Mature conservatives (classical liberals) will not hold the personal opinions of emotionally immature people (regardless of their IQ and/or academic credentials) in high esteem. You admit below what we already know: "We can be short on common sense."
Kerry Emanuel of MIT admits it too when he wrote: "The evolution of the scientific debate about anthropogenic climate change illustrates both the value of skepticism and the pitfalls of partisanship." " Scientists are most effective when they provide sound, impartial advice, but their reputation for impartiality is severely compromised by the shocking lack of political diversity among American academics, who suffer from the kind of group-think that develops in cloistered cultures. Until this profound and well documented intellectual homogeneity changes, scientists will be suspected of constituting a leftist think tank. " "On the left, an argument emerged urging fellow scientists to deliberately exaggerate their findings so as to galvanize an apathetic public..." - Kerry Emanuel HERE
Still, I think we have some common ground.
When you talk about the differences between me and a typical leftist, you might as well be talking about different species. For instance, the typical leftist liberal obsesses over trivial racial differences, but the differences between me and a white leftist are infinitely greater than any differences based on race, class or gender. I am Caucasian, but view myself as a member of the same race as anyone who shares my values. Therefore, Thomas Sowell and I are members of the same race. Intellectuals and Society" ~ Thomas Sowell
"I'd like to say something a bit more personal. I'm an academic. We spend a lot of our lives thinking about very abstract, technical things. This makes academics prone to elaboration and understatement in our area of expertise, and simultaneously to oversimplification and overconfidence outside of it. We can be short on common sense, but we can have counterinuitive insight in technical matters. It takes academics, entrepreneurs, and factory workers to make a plane fly, and it takes all of us to make the right decisions for America. I think that anti-intellectualism marginalizes an important part of American society, and I think it's destructive. To those who say that small businessmen have nothing of value to say about the US economy, I say you're wrong, and to those who say that academic economists have nothing to say about the US economy, I also say you're wrong. Please leave comments if you'd like. I'll try to respond tomorrow. We, Americans, conservative and liberal, need to figure out our own compromises, because our media and our politicians sure as taxes won't do it for us. Like it or not, we're in it together."
I have many liberal friends and we get along great because we understand each other. They already know that if any of them ever ran for political office (dog-catcher to President), I would never vote for them, and would actually work to prevent them from winning any election. (We love our children, but would never entrust them with running the household). :)
On a final note, I'll post this accurate observation:
"There is a reason why leftism is an ideology that appeals to victims, losers, misfits, the envious, the unhappy, the self-defeating, the educated-beyond-their intelligence, and the addle-brained young. It is not that leftism creates the demand. Rather, these people demand an ideology to cater to their various pathologies and deficits. In other words, it is a demand-side politics that arises from certain unfortunate but ubiquitous trends in human nature. However, once the ideology is created, then its central task becomes the creation of more lost souls who demand the ideology of leftism. Here again, this is one of the keys to understanding most any leftist policy, which fosters dependency, envy, narcissistic entitlement, and victimization." ~ Robert Godwin, Ph.D Clinical Psychologist
Looking forward to your reply. bttt
Huh? They did that in China under Mao...HUH?
Says you.
I wish I could agree with you. Unfortunately many have behaved exactly as I expected them to, so disappointment doesn't enter into it.
Truly? Please, PLEASE, describe for us which parts of the Bill of Rights are no longer applicable in our oh-so "modern" state. Search and Seizure limits? Free Speech? Assembly? Right to petition? Forbidding a state religion? Cruel Punishment? Quartering troops? Due Process? Double Jeopardy? Self-incrimination? Jury trial? Speedy trial? Public trial? Right to counsel?
Hint: the Constitution was written with basic Human Nature in mind. Humans still love, hate, envy, desire power over others, etc etc etc. None of that has changed, and thus, the protections of the Constitution ought not change, either.
Your intellectual assignment is to re-read the Federalist Papers #10, 14, 39, and 51. They aren't that long. Their logic is proven, and the aspects of human nature they describe are unchanged.
Oh, and welcome to FR. There are a few Lefties here and there, but only a few are as measured as you in their posts. I hope to see more of yours around here!
Sorry to break the news to you.
You’re not a liberal. Liberals were (once) as you describe. No more. Long ago the leftwing, big-brother statist fringe took over and eliminated that “liberalism” from the American scene. It’s dead Jim.
You are a libertarian.
“Personally... I'd like to put you all against the wall... but then I believe in the Constitution... and I actually understand the men that wrote it.”
Understand that I fight against my emotional urges... that is CONSERVATIVE... liberals give into their darkside.
LLS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.