Being called a liberal is nothing to be ashamed of

Posted by ( Geriberi ) on October 12, 2008 at 9:51 am

If we do not stop discouraging manufacturers from keeping their businesses in the U.S., we will have no choice but to become a socialist welfare state.  According to the democrats, we must penalize greatness and encourage mediocrity.  We already give plenty to the less fortunate.  How many millions of people receive “refund” checks for more taxes than they paid?  How many poor people already have free healthcare?  And what is this about “the arts?“  Are you saying I should work my tail off and give a huge chunk of my money to the government so they can subsidize “the arts” to a greater degree than they are already doing?  Is this really more important than national security?  How about all of the wealthy liberals just take that over completely?  Do you think my tax dollars should go toward paying for an abortion for someone who gets drunk and has unprotected sex on a regular basis?  And what, exactly, do you see as fair and equitable treatment of the poor?  I was poor for many, many years, and I can tell you that I never would have pushed myself to get to a better place if the government had made things easier for me.  Ditto recovery - I would not have stopped drinking and drugging if I weren’t facing homelessness.  My views on the dangers of big government “taking care” of the people is based on personal experience - I am so grateful that my choices were necessarily based on personal responsibility.  And yes, if I can do it, anyone can - it’s just that simple.  With NO HELP from the government, I went from the verge of homelessness to comfortable.  If the government had provided me with everything I needed I would probably be dead.  It’s called “loving people to death.“  And you know what?  My husband and I have worked very, very hard for years and years.  I hope that we will reach that magic number of $250,000 so we can afford to do the things we’ve always wanted to do, but couldn’t afford.  Now, if Obama wins, we will not work so hard and will settle for less.  And this is what most Americans will decide as well.  He will force us into being a nation of mediocrity, because excellence will be penalized.  If the government gets out of the way, American businesses will stay in America and provide good jobs to its citizens, and everyone will have the American dream within their grasp.  Why does Obama insist on telling the poor that they can’t accomplish what he did, or what I did for that matter?
I absolutely agree that we need a third party, though I don’t see what shots these extreme right-wingers are calling.  The thing you failed to mention was that we don’t have an extreme conservative running for president - quite to the contrary - McCain is not conservative enough for most of us.  But we certainly do have an extreme liberal running - and his ideas absolutely do border on socialism.  Indoctrination included - check out Nickelodeon, which I had the misfortune to be watching this morning when an Obama ad came on.  Public education will become one of his “tools,“ as it was in his little project shared with William Ayers in Chicago.
As someone who’s been on both sides of these issues, I am heartbroken to think that, just as I understand the thinking behind small government and self-reliance, that is going to be a thing of the past.  It also is heartbreaking that we are as divided as we are as a nation.  I would love to see a 3rd party emerge, perhaps libertarianism.  My son is an elementary school teacher who will vote for a libertarian in the next election if given a chance, as will many of his friends.  Maybe that will be the country’s saving grace.  If we survive that long.

Report Inappropriate Comment

Posted by ( Geriberi ) on October 11, 2008 at 12:08 pm

As someone who once considered herself a liberal, I agree that the above definitions are what it once meant.  That has changed, and it now means (for far too many) leaning far, far left towards socialism, encouraging mediocrity from its citizens, encouraging class warfare & divisive thinking, encouraging a welfare state, and unrealistic in what is required to maintain our status as a free nation militarily.  It means we’re going from the “American Dream” to the “American Entitlement.“  All of the conservatives I know are good, generous people who give and give until it sometimes hurts.  Under Obama, our taxes will be raised so high (and yes, naive ones, he will have to change his policy here once elected - there aren’t going to be enough people making over $250,000 to pay for his little goodies package) that we won’t be able to give to the charities of our choosing.  His Highness will decide who is the most deserving - he is, after all, so much smarter than the rest of us.
You can quote whatever definition you want from whatever source - the truth is that liberalism does not mean what it once did.  It is absolutely about moving this country far, far away from its roots, and closer and closer to huge government making all of our decisions for us.  And yes, if people don’t take off the blinders and acknowledge the pattern in who Obama chooses to align himself with, he will win the election, and it will be too late.

Report Inappropriate Comment

Posted by ( wonderbread ) on October 10, 2008 at 6:07 pm

Too many ‘conservatives’ seem to believe nearly everything Rush Limbaugh and/or Ann Coulter say ... about the other side and many other things. If individuals would look at their own conscience, be true to their own convictions and simply respect similarities and differences ... we’d be way better off. OF course, I live in the real world, and my wish might be a tall order.
Nice letter, BTW

Report Inappropriate Comment

Posted by ( rjma ) on October 10, 2008 at 9:32 am

Another interesting definition is “Maverick” which sounds a lot closer to liberal than conservative.

Report Inappropriate Comment