Actress Jean Smart: I'll Never Forgive Anyone For Being Republican

I never watched Designing Trollops, and I’ve never heard of Jean Smart. Why should I care what she says? Just another liberal dipstick from Hollyweird.

I googled her to find out who she is, and I still don’t know who she is. I guess her likes and dislikes mean squat to me.

What an IDIOT. Liberalism is a MMENTAL DISORDER.

Dixie is dead.

50 MILLION DEAD INNOCENT BABIES are UNFORGIVABLE, JEANIE!!!

Thanks Nachum.

Goodness gracious! She looks like a washed-up floozy, but she is 60.

As usual, actors who alienate half of their audience, and expect everyone to continue supporting them, are mentally challenged.

Don't know her.
Never watched the show.
~~Could~~ Couldn't care less what she thinks..

No Hamilton was a big believer in a Strong Central Government. Not small limited government.
You may want to look up exactly what the definition of Conservatism is.

More to the point the Classical Definition of Liberal in the European sense of the word:

Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual, with private property and bodily integrity[20][21] seen as essential rights. This forms the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. According to Alan Ryan, the ideology of the original classical liberals argued against direct democracy, where law is made by majority vote by citizens, “for there is nothing in the bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of property or maintain rule of law.”[22] For example, James Madison argued for a constitutional republic with protections for individual liberty over a pure democracy, reasoning that, in a pure democracy, a “common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole...and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party....”[23]

According to Anthony Quinton, classical liberals believe that “an unfettered market” is the most efficient mechanism to satisfy human needs and channel resources to their most productive uses: they “are more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government.”[24] Anarcho-capitalist Walter Block claims, however, that, while Adam Smith was an advocate of economic freedom, he also allowed for government to intervene in many areas.[25]

Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable, and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights: “...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’, because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”[26] For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature—rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism or welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others.[27] Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are “hostile to the welfare state.”[22] They do not have an interest in material equality but only in “equality before the law”.[28] Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.[29]

Friedrich Hayek identified two different traditions within classical liberalism: the “British tradition” and the “French tradition”. Hayek saw the British philosophers Bernard Mandeville, David Hume, Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, Josiah Tucker, Edmund Burke and William Paley as representative of a tradition that articulated beliefs in empiricism, the common law, and in traditions and institutions which had spontaneously evolved but were imperfectly understood. The French tradition included Rousseau, Condorcet, the Encyclopedists and the Physiocrats. This tradition believed in rationalism and sometimes showed hostility to tradition and religion. Hayek conceded that the national labels did not exactly correspond to those belonging to each tradition: Hayek saw the Frenchmen Montesquieu, Constant and Tocqueville as belonging to the “British tradition” and the British Thomas Hobbes, Priestley, Richard Price and Thomas Paine as belonging to the “French tradition”.[30] Hayek also rejected the label “laissez faire” as originating from the French tradition and alien to the beliefs of Hume, Smith and Burke.