DEFINE LIBERAL

[BlueTiki]

Progressive is the new term for liberalism.

Lipstick on a pig.

[blueberryhill]

I am sometimes unsuccessful in sending link I choose; am I the only one that has this issue? Anyway, I tried to find an unbiased website and wanted something short and concise, but no, this article is really too long, but unbiased IMO.....

Most people's beliefs don't fall under one political platform across the board. It is normally a mixture of conservative and liberal viewpoints which places most l people in the middle. If you fall at one of the extremes of right or left, you are fanatical about your beliefs and too hard headed to have common sense and you will try to cram your beliefs down the throats of everyone who disagrees with you.

Too many of you generalize and stereotype people to the point of just being close minded and unwilling to listen to each other. This works both ways and I am being neutral here.

Here is the link and you can yell and scream at me if it doesn't work:

htttps://blog.udemy.com/liberal-vs-conservative/

[crash]

Too many of you generalize

[blueberryhill]

Oh, dang, the link isn't working.....nevermind

[blueberryhill]

Too many of you generalize

Oh, Mr. Crash, what am I going to do with you, hon.......I know you are an expert on U.S. politics, but the above statement is true, not funny.......
For example, do you recall that Mr. BG said banning pitbulls was a "liberal" thing. That is what I was referring to....
As you probably have guessed, I am more liberal, than conservative, but I do like pit bulls and disagree that they should be banned. I don't understand why everything you (not you personally) disagree with is the other party's fault.

You have to pick your battles and quit blaming the other guy for every dang thing which is wrong with this country....Bitching, moaning, complaining, whining does not resolve problems, only promotes division rather than being united (States)

[crash]

Hah... I know about as much about US politics as you do about string theory. I was just laughing at the irony. You know, making a point about generalisation with a generalist comment.

[Maggot]

You're not a Liberal B.H. your a humanist. Sounds better and rhymes with Hypnotist, in a quasi sexual way somewhere.


I think Duchess was thinking of me when she posted this because I'm always blaming Liberals for this or that but without them who the hell would kick the bee-hive? Then blame everyone else for getting stung.

[blueberryhill]

Hah... I know about as much about US politics as you do about string theory. I was just laughing at the irony. You know, making a point about generalisation with a generalist comment.

You know, don't you, that I have been scolded for being verbose so in the interest of being concise, alas, I must generalize. So sorry, my life is full of irony. string theory?

[blueberryhill]

You're not a Liberal B.H. your a humanist. Sounds better and rhymes with Hypnotist, in a quasi sexual way somewhere.


I think Duchess was thinking of me when she posted this because I'm always blaming Liberals for this or that but without them who the hell would kick the bee-hive? Then blame everyone else for getting stung.

Well said, Maggs. I totally agree with you....especially the bee hive analogy.....but I might have a teeny problem with "quasi" sexual way....

[HairOfTheDog]

I swing both ways politically, but mostly find myself walking in the middle of the road.

It really depends on the issue and/or the specific case whether my view aligns more closely with what's widely considered Conservative or Liberal.

Both of these summaries hold some truths, from my observations.

[BlueTiki]

BH . . . HotD:

I don't believe you ever answered Duchess' question.

I believe liberals avoid answering direct questions.

[Duchess]

I think Duchess was thinking of me when she posted this

Tis true you inspired it. You see many Liberals but I don't think I've ever encountered any. They are like 'coons, I know they are here on the farm but I've never seen one.

I'm surrounded by Republicans and every now & then I'll say, "I'm a Liberal and I'm breathing your air". I do it for my own amusement, it makes me laugh. I'm not a Liberal.

[Carsman]

Hello 2015 . . . ROBIN HOOD IS BACK!!!

As a brief reminder for those who forgot or for
many that may not know.

Here is what happened, quietly, on January 1, 2015:



Medicare tax went from 1.45% to 2.35%

Top Income tax bracket went from 35% to 39.6%
PUNISH THE WORKERS....TO REWARD THE NON WORKERS

Top Income payroll tax went from 37.4% to 52.2%
MORE PUNISHMENT FOR WORKING HARD!

Capital Gains tax went from 15% to 28%
MORE TAX UPON INCOME THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN TAXED!

Dividend tax went from 15% to 39.6%
MORE PUNISHMENT FOR INVESTING WISELY AND MAKING GOOD DECISIONS!

Estate tax went from 0% to 55% PUNISHMENT FOR SAVING FOR THE NEXT GENERATION! ONLY TO HAVE IT GO TO THE GOVERNMENT!

A 3.5% Real Estate transaction tax was added. MORE PUNISHMENT FOR INVESTING IN A HOME OR RENTAL PROPERTY!

Remember this fact:
These taxes were all passed solely with Democrat votes, Not a single Republican voted for these new taxes.

These taxes were all passed in the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.



WORKING AMERICA . . . WAKE UP!!!

[Duchess]

Remember this fact:
These taxes were all passed solely with Democrat votes, Not a single Republican voted for these new taxes.

Republicans didn't have a say at all?

[SIXFOOTERsez]

Yep, I have a bunch of assholes working can't wait ti its legal here. Bad news for them is your still not going to climb my towers with a head full of pot.

Climbing towers stoned? Hell no, but the dude in Colorado was disabled and using it for medicinal purposes. I think the Colorado court ruling was a bit harsh (no pun intended).

Agreed

[HairOfTheDog]

Tiki...

Yes, I have a real problem answering questions and being direct, and also struggle with contributing to a discussion as I see fit and mixing things up a bit.

But, to be all rigid about it -- in a political sense...

I consider Liberal policy to be that which strives to expand equality for all in the current society, with government having a large and often intrusive/unnecessary role in addressing real or perceived inequalities, many times via legislation.

I consider Conservative policy to be that which strives to keep things as they are with limited government intervention, except when times and social views change enough that "as they are" is challenged to a point of discomfort. Then, efforts to restrict or attempt to keep things "as they were" are often pursued, many times via legislation.

I don't mind being called "Liberal". It often doesn't fit (not by my definition and especially not according to yours), but then I don't mind being called "Conservative" whether it fits or not either. Both are sometimes true.

In my experience, on the whole, Liberal politicians and people who advocate for Liberal policies are no more or less apt to answer questions directly than Conservative politicians and people who advocate for Conservative policies.

[Jimbone]

Republicans didn't have a say at all?

When it came to Obamacare, they did not.

Not one Republican voted for it in either the House or the Senate.

Vote was 60 - 39 in the Senate, all Democrats voting YES, all Republicans voting NO.

Vote was 219 - 212 in the House, with 34 Democrats voting NO with the Republicans.

With a filibuster-proof Senate, the Democrats were able to close the amendment and debate without any procedural interference from Republicans. Any debate that did happen was academic, as the Democrats were voting as a block to deliver for the Democratic President. It wasn't without having to do some negotiating with Democrats who were not completely onboard however... examples like the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase (pork barrel money) deals were made with Democratic Senators from Nebraska and Louisiana to secure their vote.

In the House, there was similar horse trading that occurred to secure the needed votes for passage. There was no procedural way for Republicans to stop the House vote since the committees are tilted in favor of the majority (Democrat in this case).

The seismic shift in the majority (from Democrat control to Republican control) of both the House and Senate in subsequent elections is widely attributed to the party line vote on Obamacare.

Before Obamacare, the Democrats controlled the House 257 to 178 for Republicans. Today the Republicans control the house 247 to 188. They also controlled the Senate 58 - 40 with 2 Independents (who caucus with the Democrats). Today the Republicans control the Senate 54 -44 with 2 Independents (who caucus with the Democrats).

[Duchess]

...but that works both ways, right? Republicans will push things through when they have the majority of the vote.

[Jimbone]

...but that works both ways, right? Republicans will push things through when they have the majority of the vote.

That's correct.

The purpose of the separate but equal parts of government were intended to provide checks and balances. When one party controls the Congress and the Executive Branch, that check and balance can disappear - but should technically be representative of the will of the electorate.

[BlueTiki]

Tiki...

Yes, I have a real problem answering questions and being direct, and also struggle with contributing to a discussion as I see fit and mixing things up a bit.

But, to be all rigid about it -- in a political sense...

I consider Liberal policy to be that which strives to expand equality for all in the current society, with government having a large and often intrusive/unnecessary role in addressing real or perceived inequalities, many times via legislation.

HotD . . . you know that I always view you as Mock's wallflower!

I now will add: I believe liberals look for the insult when one isn't there.

I appreciated your "rigid" definition . . . articulate, thoughtful and thorough.

I will now add: When asked for the time, liberals will tell you how to build the watch.

That was for the rest of your post!