Definition of 'liberal'?

If you want examples of leftist thought a.k.a. "liberals":
Research...
George Lakoff- Prof. of cognitive science and linguistics at the University of California.
George Soros-billionare financier of the secular-progressive movement.
Peter Lewis- one of the founders of the secular-progressive movement. By the way, he's the president of, you guessed it, Progressive Insurance.

These are a few examples of people that mean a complete overhaul of america, stripping the Constitution, and having huge government. To me, IMHO, is a liberal in clear definition.
 
These are a few examples of people that mean a complete overhaul of america, stripping the Constitution, and having huge government. To me, IMHO, is a liberal in clear definition.
Click to expand...

So what do you call a conservative who wants to strip the constitution? Or is there no such thing?

What about someone who wants huge government but doesn't want to strip the government?

How about someone who wants to strip the government but wants a smaller government?
 
Just FYI, the MODERN use of the term liberal comes from Communist party members here in the US during the 50s/60s trying to come up with a word for communist/marxist ideas that did not scare the scare the bejezus out of an American public already brainwashed to be terrified of the Soviets. They stole the word liberal, which at the time obviously meant nearly the opposite of what it means today. Sort of like the "patriot act" of the mid 20th century if you will.
 
Research them, foob. If the Dems have control of the Congress as well as the Pres. being a Rep., people will get the real idea of what a bigger gov't is actually like.
Don't worry, though. A Dem. president will be elected and we're all going to experience it.:rolleyes:
Everybody thinks it's bad now, wait in 2yrs. and you'll see what I mean.
Republicans are not perfect. I've been disappointed the last few years on what they have accomplished as a whole. But it beats the immediate solution. Each one has similar but not the exact same view. But, like I said, the Dems. are really going to show soon what bigger gov't is going to be like. Goodbye, tax credits. Hello, tax hikes. Goodbye more take home pay to do what I think is best for my household. Hello, smaller net income. Goodbye slow, solid recovering stock market. Hello, another recession. (Insert blame Republicans here, or everywhere for that matter.)

You can say what you want, but the conservatives have, for the most part, made a good run at preserving the Constitution. You can't just pass a bill through stating every state, no matter what, becomes a shall issue state. It'll get thrown out in a New York minute. What good is that? Compromise and politics always come in play whether we like it or not. So, issues do become watered down to get to pass. It's better than nothing. Later, if the new bill proves better for society, then you can introduce one that's improved.
I've made my statement on examples of today's liberal. No need to repeat myself and you guys getting an even bigger headache by reading more of my opinion.:D
 
Actually, Chris,
If you want an example of a liberal, research Alan Colmbs. He is a self proclaimed liberal on FOX news channel's Hannity and Colmbs.
 
The left wing, formally "Liberals" are referring to themselves now as "Progressives". It appears that it's all a game of semantics. To use a single word to define oneself or another, is quite restrictive. If I'm 5'5" and I stand next to a guy who's 5', I might call myself tall. Does that make me tall? If one reads the Federalist Papers they would find that James Madison, the so called Father of the Constitution, and the other Federalists were against the Bill of Rights. Does that then make Madison anti-freedom? The Federalists supported a small central government and states rights being paramount. At the time, that was quite a liberal philosophy, given that the rest of the world was ruled by kings, queens, czars, emperors and other assorted sovereigns.
It's all about words and how they are used. It's all relative. If you want to be thin, stand next to a really fat guy and call yourself skinny.
Call it what you will, but being able to solidly know, defend and express your beliefs is the bottom line.
 
You can say what you want, but the conservatives have, for the most part, made a good run at preserving the Constitution.
Click to expand...

I would have to respectfully disagree. We lost more civil liberties through legislation and executive action this past 5 years than in any 5 years of US history. Maybe it didn't affect you, like it didn't affect most Americans, so you haven't felt the damage. One day it may happen to you, because it already has happened to someone else, and so little people are speaking out against it. But the worse thing is it will never be returned, there's no incentive for either Republicans or Democrats to give up power over the people once taken from them.

A single party that controls congress, the white house, and has a majority in the supreme court is never a good thing. Never.
 
Foob,
Can you give some examples? I ask because I value people's opinions and want to be educated. I see some major items that went the way of the 2A, such as the AWB, castle doctrine in fla.(although that happened on a state level), and frivolous lawsuits against firearm manufacurers are under attack. I just see most liberals are outspokenly against the 2A.
 
Tuttle...you are looking at a very small part of the picture..the 2nd Amendment. There is much more to freedom than just the right to keep and bear arms. Some of those other rights are enumerated in the Bill of Rights, others are not. Both the conservatives and the liberals have destroyed those rights.

From time to time, small aspects of those rights are seemingly restored by one side or the other but on the whole both parties consistently take away our rights at every opportunity. The conservatives are big on taking away our social liberties (the right to self medicate, the right to love and marry whomever we may wish, the right to enjoy whatever forms of entertainment we may wish). The believe that their moral views trump our rights. The liberals destroy our economic freedoms. Their wealth redistribution schemes are nothing short of theft. Their belief that government's job is to take care of everybody has produced a whole nation of dependent people who feel that they are entitled to the fruits of other people's labor. That they are not responsible for their own well being.

Both sides love nothing more than to pass new laws. Neither side will ever do anything MEANINGFUL to turn back the tide of statism and tyranny. They've both had many opportunites to do so and repeatedly refuse.
 
Danzig,
Point taken, but I still want some specifics. I know the 2A is just a small part of it all, but since this forum is focused on firearms, I used it as an example. Your specifics, to me is a good general definition of what each party has sided on. I see some form of government is necessary to assist or regulate to some extent to keep the public safe. For instance; I don't think legalizing heroine or the like will be a good idea just because some think it's a form of medication. Some governing is needed in a country of this size. How much or how little is up to the people. The problem with that is I think representatives of ALL parties become more deaf the longer they're in office.
Hope that clears up some of the fog.
Thanks for sharing your opinion.;)
 
Foob,
Can you give some examples? I ask because I value people's opinions and want to be educated. I see some major items that went the way of the 2A, such as the AWB, castle doctrine in fla.(although that happened on a state level), and frivolous lawsuits against firearm manufacurers are under attack. I just see most liberals are outspokenly against the 2A.
Click to expand...

The Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act II (tacked onto other bills)
The Military Commissions Act.
Some signing statements.
The arbitrary and vague definition and designation of enemy combatants.
The warrantless wiretapping
The indefinite detention of Jose Padilla, an American citizen arrested on American soil.

Probably more, but that's all I remember right now.

The 2nd amendment is useless by itself, if all other rights are removed, there's nothing for the 2nd amendment to defend.

Edit: Got one more, rendition - the act of transporting suspected terrorists to other countries for torture (precisely because they know it's illegal to do so in the US and other more civilized countries). This has been admitted by the administration/CIA. Also read about the case of a Canadian (Maher Arar) mistakenly accused of being a terrorist and transported to Syria for torture. The Canadian authorities apologised for the mistake, the US government has never apologised for arresting him and sending him to be tortured.
 
Thanks, foob.
I have my opinion on some. The others I'll need to research the details and hope to get back. It may not be in this thread due to off subject content and I'm slow to research and form an opinion. Nevertheless, It's appreciated.
 
Liberal?

Those people describing themselves as Liberal today are anything but. It is most glaringly obvious without even getting involved in their political philosophy.

Just look at how tolerant they are or any viewpoint but their own. It seems they do their best to make anyone who disagrees with their politics as a fire breathing Nazi, racist, etc., monster who eats babies for breakfast and your human rights for lunch. Their enemies are evil (they say). This isn't very liberal in my book.

They have taken a name, ripped from its actual definition, and made it into their camoflage to hide their true nature and intentions from the world. If we were to be honest and judge tham solely by their actions and rehetoric, we would call them "elitist", not Liberal. The same can be said for many who use other names as well. "Conservatives" are often not. Some are as bad in their views as so called Liberals.

Both (all) sides claim to have nothing but the best interests of the people (us) at heart, and everything they do is done for our good. Just remember every ruler has used that excuse at one time or another, sometimes as justification for horrible atrocities.

Don't forget what paves the road to hell. Good Intentions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top