what is a liberal and which historical leaders were liberals?

[Redfish]

Conservative has always meant against government.

No, idiot, against the govt by being the govt doesnt make the least bit of sense. conservatives agenda has always been to conserve society by being the government. this radical destroy all government institutions hysteria they have developed is a recent invention; they have been infected by the same mind plague that made the soviet union fall apart. "Hey we could spend money fixing that bridge, that we know is going to fall down, but fuck it, that just means we have to tax our donors to pay for it and they hate that"

You could not be more wrong. Conservatives are not opposed to infrastructure, conservatives do not want bridges to fall down. Smaller government does not mean neglecting infrastructure, it means doing it efficiently and effectively, cutting out the waste and corruption.

Liberals are the ones that want to BE the government, they want to impose their views on everyone and punish those who dare to disagree. If your church or state wants gay marriage,fine I do not want to tell you how to live, but don't mandate that my church and my state condone gay marriage--------its called freedom.

 

[regent]

When defining liberal/conservative we should start with people, not government. Governments are but tools that people use to enhance their lives. When royalty ruled governments were used by the nobles, kings and church for the good of their group. When people rule, they tend to use government for the good of their group. Since the constitution, the political battle has always been which group shall rule and the ruling group gets to use the government to enhance their group.
We should start with the eternal liberal/conservative question: are people basically good or basically bad?

 

[Redfish]

When defining liberal/conservative we should start with people, not government. Governments are but tools that people use to enhance their lives. When royalty ruled governments were used by the nobles, kings and church for the good of their group. When people rule, they tend to use government for the good of their group. Since the constitution, the political battle has always been which group shall rule and the ruling group gets to use the government to enhance their group.
We should start with the eternal liberal/conservative question: are people basically good or basically bad?

I really think the conservative/liberal difference is the the role and power of government.

conservatives want small government and individual freedom and personal responsibility, liberals want large goverment and less individual freedom.

I guess your premise as to whether people are basically good or bad may apply if you are saying that liberals believe people to be basically bad and therefore must be controlled by a large intrusive government.

 

[rightwinger]

I would like to hear from both sides on this.

My definition of a modern day liberal is someone that wants a big intrusive controlling government, someone who wants wealth and income redistribution, someone who wants abortion on demand but does not want the 2nd amendment upheld, someone who wants to punish success and reward failure, someone who is comfortable being a slave to the government and wants an active thought and speech police.

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

 

[Katzndogz]

Today's marxists are not your daddy's liberals.

 

[Dragonlady]

hitler---more of an angry racist dictator but liberal in wanting to destroy wealth

Hilter was a right-wing facist. He didn't want to destroy wealth, he just didn't want the Jews to have it.

 

[Dragonlady]

I really think the conservative/liberal difference is the the role and power of government.

conservatives want small government and individual freedom and personal responsibility, liberals want large goverment and less individual freedom.

Every time a conservative in this thread attempts to define liberal, they get it so far wrong, that it is painfully obvious they have no idea of what liberals want, or even what a liberal is.

Liberals do not want large governments and less indidvidual freedoms. In fact, giving people reproductive choices, and choices about who they can marry, is decreasing the role of government in their lives and increasing individual freedoms, so that dog won't hunt.

Liberals don't hate wealth or rich people and in fact, many liberals are rich people, and many more would like to be. What they hate is the transfer of the wealth of the nation to those who already held the largest share of wealth, because that transfer of wealth was to the detriment of the middle class and poor, and to the detriment of the overall economy.

Liberals don't want unfettered capitalism because time and time again, it has been proven that business and competition must be regulated to ensure a level playing field for all businesses to compete effectively. Liberals believe that government does have a role to play in society, in order to maintain a level playing field for all of the people, and to provide opportunities for all of its citizens to thrive.

Liberals long for a day when social programs are unnecessary, but are not so ill-informed or callous as to believe that poor people are poor simply because they are stupid or lazy.

 

[Redfish]

I really think the conservative/liberal difference is the the role and power of government.

conservatives want small government and individual freedom and personal responsibility, liberals want large goverment and less individual freedom.

Every time a conservative in this thread attempts to define liberal, they get it so far wrong, that it is painfully obvious they have no idea of what liberals want, or even what a liberal is.

Liberals do not want large governments and less indidvidual freedoms. In fact, giving people reproductive choices, and choices about who they can marry, is decreasing the role of government in their lives and increasing individual freedoms, so that dog won't hunt.

Liberals don't hate wealth or rich people and in fact, many liberals are rich people, and many more would like to be. What they hate is the transfer of the wealth of the nation to those who already held the largest share of wealth, because that transfer of wealth was to the detriment of the middle class and poor, and to the detriment of the overall economy.

Liberals don't want unfettered capitalism because time and time again, it has been proven that business and competition must be regulated to ensure a level playing field for all businesses to compete effectively. Liberals believe that government does have a role to play in society, in order to maintain a level playing field for all of the people, and to provide opportunities for all of its citizens to thrive.

Liberals long for a day when social programs are unnecessary, but are not so ill-informed or callous as to believe that poor people are poor simply because they are stupid or lazy.

some of what you say makes sense, but I do not think you speak for many of the "liberals" that are in control of our government.

some people are poor because they are lazy and/or stupid, to pretend otherwise is ignoring reality, some are poor because of mental or physical problems--we should help those people, some are poor because they made poor choices in life--they need to be responsible for those choices.

as to capitalism being inherently evil as you suggested, that is simply wrong, basic human nature is capitalistic, we all want to better our station in life, that desireis not evil. abusing others in that pursuit is evil but we already have plenty of laws to cover that---ask Madoff.

liberals seem to want to control thoughts and opinions---thats the aspect of liberalism that bothers me most, there is no tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them.

obama is a perfect example os such intolerance---he is determined to destroy those who do not buy in to his marxist ideas--even if it means destroying the economy in the process.

 

[Redfish]

I really think the conservative/liberal difference is the the role and power of government.

conservatives want small government and individual freedom and personal responsibility, liberals want large goverment and less individual freedom.

Every time a conservative in this thread attempts to define liberal, they get it so far wrong, that it is painfully obvious they have no idea of what liberals want, or even what a liberal is.

Liberals do not want large governments and less indidvidual freedoms. In fact, giving people reproductive choices, and choices about who they can marry, is decreasing the role of government in their lives and increasing individual freedoms, so that dog won't hunt.

Liberals don't hate wealth or rich people and in fact, many liberals are rich people, and many more would like to be. What they hate is the transfer of the wealth of the nation to those who already held the largest share of wealth, because that transfer of wealth was to the detriment of the middle class and poor, and to the detriment of the overall economy.

Liberals don't want unfettered capitalism because time and time again, it has been proven that business and competition must be regulated to ensure a level playing field for all businesses to compete effectively. Liberals believe that government does have a role to play in society, in order to maintain a level playing field for all of the people, and to provide opportunities for all of its citizens to thrive.

Liberals long for a day when social programs are unnecessary, but are not so ill-informed or callous as to believe that poor people are poor simply because they are stupid or lazy.

you liberals always bring up "reproductive choice" meaning abortion. why is that such a major issue with you? why can't you find a better contraception method than killing your fetus? how about just keeping your legs together?

"transfer of wealth" is anothe key liberal talking point, why should people not be allowed to keep what they have earned? we already have a progressive income tax, how much more do you want?

 

[Sallow]

OK, but lets stick to today and what the term means now. the history lesson was accurate, but lets talk about what they are today.

Central planners that are just SURE they know what's best for everyone else.

right, you get the gold star..

liberal leaders from history: lets see-------

marx, lenin, mao, castro, chavez, for sure

hitler---more of an angry racist dictator but liberal in wanting to destroy wealth

First you need to learn what words actually mean:

Liberal

lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

Conservative

con·ser·va·tive (kn-sûrv-tv)
adj.
1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.
4.
a. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
b. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
5. Conservative Of or belonging to the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
6. Conservative Of or adhering to Conservative Judaism.
7. Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources.
n.
1. One favoring traditional views and values.
2. A supporter of political conservatism.
3. Conservative A member or supporter of the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
4. Archaic A preservative agent or principle.

You cannot be a "racist" and Liberal.

You can be a racist and Conservative.

 

[Redfish]

I would like to hear from both sides on this.

My definition of a modern day liberal is someone that wants a big intrusive controlling government, someone who wants wealth and income redistribution, someone who wants abortion on demand but does not want the 2nd amendment upheld, someone who wants to punish success and reward failure, someone who is comfortable being a slave to the government and wants an active thought and speech police.

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

JFK would be considered a conservative by today's standards.

 

[Sallow]

I would like to hear from both sides on this.

My definition of a modern day liberal is someone that wants a big intrusive controlling government, someone who wants wealth and income redistribution, someone who wants abortion on demand but does not want the 2nd amendment upheld, someone who wants to punish success and reward failure, someone who is comfortable being a slave to the government and wants an active thought and speech police.

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

JFK would be considered a conservative by today's standards.

Incorrect.

 

[rightwinger]

I really think the conservative/liberal difference is the the role and power of government.

conservatives want small government and individual freedom and personal responsibility, liberals want large goverment and less individual freedom.

Every time a conservative in this thread attempts to define liberal, they get it so far wrong, that it is painfully obvious they have no idea of what liberals want, or even what a liberal is.

Liberals do not want large governments and less indidvidual freedoms. In fact, giving people reproductive choices, and choices about who they can marry, is decreasing the role of government in their lives and increasing individual freedoms, so that dog won't hunt.

Liberals don't hate wealth or rich people and in fact, many liberals are rich people, and many more would like to be. What they hate is the transfer of the wealth of the nation to those who already held the largest share of wealth, because that transfer of wealth was to the detriment of the middle class and poor, and to the detriment of the overall economy.

Liberals don't want unfettered capitalism because time and time again, it has been proven that business and competition must be regulated to ensure a level playing field for all businesses to compete effectively. Liberals believe that government does have a role to play in society, in order to maintain a level playing field for all of the people, and to provide opportunities for all of its citizens to thrive.

Liberals long for a day when social programs are unnecessary, but are not so ill-informed or callous as to believe that poor people are poor simply because they are stupid or lazy.

you liberals always bring up "reproductive choice" meaning abortion. why is that such a major issue with you? why can't you find a better contraception method than killing your fetus? how about just keeping your legs together?

"transfer of wealth" is anothe key liberal talking point, why should people not be allowed to keep what they have earned? we already have a progressive income tax, how much more do you want?

Liberals do not seek to confiscate accumulated wealth.

What they do is question why do we continue economic policies that encourage one group to accumulate more wealth at the expense of others?

 

[rightwinger]

I would like to hear from both sides on this.

My definition of a modern day liberal is someone that wants a big intrusive controlling government, someone who wants wealth and income redistribution, someone who wants abortion on demand but does not want the 2nd amendment upheld, someone who wants to punish success and reward failure, someone who is comfortable being a slave to the government and wants an active thought and speech police.

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

JFK would be considered a conservative by today's standards.

Afraid he would not.

someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties

Which conservative ideals envision these ideals? Trickle down?

 

[Redfish]

Every time a conservative in this thread attempts to define liberal, they get it so far wrong, that it is painfully obvious they have no idea of what liberals want, or even what a liberal is.

Liberals do not want large governments and less indidvidual freedoms. In fact, giving people reproductive choices, and choices about who they can marry, is decreasing the role of government in their lives and increasing individual freedoms, so that dog won't hunt.

Liberals don't hate wealth or rich people and in fact, many liberals are rich people, and many more would like to be. What they hate is the transfer of the wealth of the nation to those who already held the largest share of wealth, because that transfer of wealth was to the detriment of the middle class and poor, and to the detriment of the overall economy.

Liberals don't want unfettered capitalism because time and time again, it has been proven that business and competition must be regulated to ensure a level playing field for all businesses to compete effectively. Liberals believe that government does have a role to play in society, in order to maintain a level playing field for all of the people, and to provide opportunities for all of its citizens to thrive.

Liberals long for a day when social programs are unnecessary, but are not so ill-informed or callous as to believe that poor people are poor simply because they are stupid or lazy.

you liberals always bring up "reproductive choice" meaning abortion. why is that such a major issue with you? why can't you find a better contraception method than killing your fetus? how about just keeping your legs together?

"transfer of wealth" is anothe key liberal talking point, why should people not be allowed to keep what they have earned? we already have a progressive income tax, how much more do you want?

Liberals do not seek to confiscate accumulated wealth.

What they do is question why do we continue economic policies that encourage one group to accumulate more wealth at the expense of others?

which policies would those be? be specific, which govt policies enourage one group to accumulate wealth at the expense of others?

envy and jealousy are not acceptable answers.

 

[Redfish]

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

JFK would be considered a conservative by today's standards.

Afraid he would not.

someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties

Which conservative ideals envision these ideals? Trickle down?

"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" need I say more?

 

[Redfish]

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party nomination (JFK 14 September 1960)

JFK would be considered a conservative by today's standards.

Incorrect.

"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" need I say more?

 

[Dragonlady]

"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" need I say more?

Yes, I remember that quote, and I also remember the context in which he made it: as a call to the youth of America to help America fight tyranny, poverty, disease and war, and not as a conservative meme against taking anything from the government.

Now the trumpet summons us again—not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are—but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"—a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.

Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility—I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it—and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.

 

[Pogo]

I would like to hear from both sides on this.

My definition of a modern day liberal is someone that wants a big intrusive controlling government, someone who wants wealth and income redistribution, someone who wants abortion on demand but does not want the 2nd amendment upheld, someone who wants to punish success and reward failure, someone who is comfortable being a slave to the government and wants an active thought and speech police.

...... So how come you ask for "both sides" -- and then immediately pollute the debate with a slanted diatribe? You notice how long it took for Godwin's Law to arrive? The next post.

That whole mantra about "big government" was something the Reaganites invented. "Big government" has never been a goal of anybody; not in this country anyway. Just another facile pandering pseudoargument to demonize the opposition in the licentious quest for personal power. There is no point to "big government", unless you're a top-down hierarchy like the Soviet Union.

The rest of your laundry list is just reactionary bullshit not based on even a wisp of philosophy, a cherry-pick of emotional basket case hot-button issues of strictly recent vintage, signifying nothing philosophically. You've polluted your own discussion before it starts, which renders the whole thing worthless, as your pretentious claim to want "both sides" is a joke.

For what it's worth, liberal means liberty. That means freedom of expression and livelihood. The entire "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" sentiments, drawing off the Rousseau and Voltaire ideas of the time, are eminently liberalism. It's the cloth the United States is made from. "Nothing in America's founding, or the creation of the United States, was of a conservative nature" -- John Dean, Conservatives Without Conscience, p. 12

If you want an honest discussion you'll have to present it more honestly than you have here. This isn't even close.

 

[Redfish]

"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" need I say more?

Yes, I remember that quote, and I also remember the context in which he made it: as a call to the youth of America to help America fight tyranny, poverty, disease and war, and not as a conservative meme against taking anything from the government.

Now the trumpet summons us again—not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are—but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"—a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.

Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility—I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it—and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.

yes, you have it in context. Did obama say anything remotely close to that context? NO.

I repeat, by today's standards Kennedy would be considered a conservative---by words, deeds, and context.