I had to think a long time, wondering if I was actually a liberal conservative, but I finally came down on the side of conservative liberal.
I actually find these labels demeaning. They are over simplifications that say very little, and often incorrectly, about a person's actual points of view. More than I can count on this forum, the query has been thrust in my face..."how can you be gay and a conservative"? ie, if the label fits, wear it, or else. Hogwash.
Johnny can't finish his homework; he's really stuck and won't be allowed to go out and play until it's done.
Everyone agrees Johnny needs and should have help.
The conservative takes Johnny to the library, shows him the resource area, gives him some pointers, and sets him on his way to finish his homework, by himself.
The liberal gives Johnny the answers, or does Johnny's homework, and Johnny goes out to play.
Sorry davidinindy. Can't usurp the point I made for your own and turn it into a positive representation of liberalism. and profanity doesn't make your point any more strong! ;)
I agree with HerrKaiser and labels.
I believe anyone who considers themselves extreme one way or the other is, well, fucked up. Just look at Tim McVey. He was an extremist right-winger.
I'm left of many issues and right of more, but I really don't fit into a category or label. Don't know why so many wanna draw a line and demand one be one or the other. I've seen it most of my life. So many demands by the gay community that a guy or gal has to be left-wing or turn in his/her gay membership card if he/she isn't. I've been told that. Sorry, but as it has been proven (I dare anyone try to disprove me by Google searches, Wikipedia, or their favorite left-leaning blog/info source) by the very members here that there are many of us who are gay/queer/fags/homo's/alternate lifestyle types who don't subscribe or adhere to the lock-step, sted-fast rules of the liberal left.
Brad
Hi Brad!
I understand what both you and HK are saying, but I really don't think Gary is asking something controversial or unacceptable. He was simply asking a question. Those who feel offended need not answer. It really is that simple. But those wishing to proclaim a political party may do so here! ;)
I think that was Gary's point.
BTW... have you played your train simulator again Brad? I'd still like to find a copy of it and load it on my computer. It sounds like a lot of fun! :D
Perhaps it didn't. But your original point was extremely weak as well. ;)
NOBODY is trying to do anyone's homework. You know better than that! Don't you?
I don't think you have any right to take issue with what I post. It would be appreciated if you would not be so judgemental and mean spirited.
But all in all i guess I'm still conservative on most issues and less so on others. I guess I am more fiscally conservative and not as much on the social side of things. I'm for less taxes more personal responsibility and less federal government and more personal freedoms as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others and disrupt society. So whatever that makes me, thats what I am.
Why do you think it is over the top?
For a great many conservatives, that is truly how they view gay rights and abortion issues.
I take Jeff's comment to mean that the social conservatives in the Republican party feel no hesitation at having government control/restrict/meddle with the rights of gay people and the rights of women to make their own medical decisions, along with their doctors of course.
It should go without saying that I'm opposed to extreme actions Timothy McVeigh or Osama bin Laden style. I wonder if it is true that the source of the polarization we see in our nation is really a result of extremist viewpoints.
For instance, you're never going to get me to concede to the RR that Roe v Wade should be overturned. And it's not because I'm pro-abortion. I think if sex education were properly implemented, there'd be little to no need of abortion services. I feel the way I do because I believe very strongly in a woman's right to privacy and reproductive freedom.
Is that extreme? I don't see much middle ground. I'm even opposed to required parental notification because there are too many cases where a male family member is the father. A sad state of affairs, but I would rather place the trust in the young woman to make the decision that is best for her, hopefully with some counseling from professionals involved.
Yes, I agree Karen. Anti-gay and anti-abortion positions seem to be fundamental to a lot of social conservative platforms.I agree
Lynne, I believe it is. For rigid liberals and entrenched conservatives, there is no middle ground regarding the issues (which we don't need to list, cause' we know em'). With no middle ground or flexibility, we remain at odds. This is why peaceful negotiations regarding ideals or tyrany have rarely worked as long as man has walked this earth. What has worked is war because there is no middle-ground.
If I were to say I am extremely conservative (which no one here has said he/she is, and I don't think there is one that is a Bettermost member), what would one assume. I'm an atheist. I vote for equal rights. I have and will continue to vote for Democrats if they stand for fiscal conservatism and my idea of what government is or isn't. Extreme liberalism has as many negatives as extreme conservatism in the eyes of a right-leaning individual and for this discussion, I'm not thinking of bin Ladens & McVeighs, but they are true extremists and my statement got people thinking.
When the only thing people have in common is these threads, we become icons and avatars. When we post an ideal and it flies in the face of someones values/beliefs there seems to be this need by some to prove the other wrong. I don't reckon if we all had the wherewithall to get together once a week or month for drinks, etc., the constant hot topic would be politics, religion, and trying to prove each other wrong. When we know where each other is coming from, decide if other social components are compatible with ours, and move on.
Brad
At the far left of the political left are what are referred to as "progressives." Progressive politics centers on reform of and change from traditional and conservative (historical models), and emphasizes a change to the old and worn out ideologies, including the traditional ideological stances of both conservatism and liberalism, and based upon the concept that the world is dynamic and needs dynamic changes in the political sphere to meet them.
I would be one of those. In fact, there is an entire slice of political independents that are known as Independent Progressives, and that is where my politics are. Unfortunately for us progressives, however, the Democrats have a tendency to want to keep the power structures of the government about where they are, and perpeturate their own place within them. The progressives' choice for a presidential candidate in 2004 was Howard Dean, and they reluctantly backed Kerry once Dean fell out of the race. Progressives were divided unequally between Edwards and Obama early in the 2008 primaries, but Obama appealed far more to moderate independents and so he gathered more steam than Edwards early on because he had a broader base of support. Generally speaking, progressives did not show much support for Clinton due to the centrist triangulation policies of Bill Clinton during his administration.
The above description of your politics makes much more sense in understanding where you stand. Sounds like your not extremely liberal after and that was my point.
Brad
I take Jeff's comment to mean that the social conservatives in the Republican party feel no hesitation at having government control/restrict/meddle with the rights of gay people and the rights of women to make their own medical decisions, along with their doctors of course.
well there shouldn't be a lot of confusion about what I stand for since I listed in my original post just about every political position I support. And I would stress that progressives, particularly "independent progressives" are considered the "extreme left wing." We're the ones who don't get upset when you call us socialists, because there is a lot to be said for the aims of social democracy. And we know Obama is not a socialist.
Nobody is interested in what goes on in bedrooms, unless it is illegal with a minor or illegal due to criminal ssault. Nobody is interested in obgyn offices either, unless the law is being broken. To label an entire party and conservative-thinking people with a broadstroke that suggests they are akin to 'Hitlers' willing executioners' and would, based on the sentiment expressed, endorse raids on gay households and doctors' offices has a ring of hysteria and offensiveness to it.
The conservative positions on gay issues and abortion extend over the same range as those of anyone else--from very much opposed to very much in favor. Yes, conservatives generally fall on that scale in different locations than their so-called liberal colleagues, but both issues have a ton of gray space where most people land.
Do not forget Mr. Clinton on gay marriage and gays in the military... and Mr. Obama on gay "marriage". Most people have little issue with civil union rights that mirror a man/woman marriage. And don't forget more than just "social conservatives in the republican party" voted Yes on Prop 8.
What are the other issues? Adoption. Clerical. Instiutional (eg BSA). Adoption seems to be working out well. Clerical...Ah, the liberal view is that church and state should be completely separate, so this should not be an issue; Churches should do what they want. Institutional issues are also working just fine; the public sector institutions have no barring policies, and even private concerns tend not to; they all obey the law or get sued.
Abortion is the only procedure that apparently gives rise to the omnibus claim that conservatives want to control the relationship between women and their docs. One would think that such a claim could only come if abortions are 90% or more of all reasons to be in a obgyn office, but that is not the case. Is it?
again, the range of postions on abortion is broader than labeling conservatives as intrusive nut cases. Most people, left and right, are not in favor of late term abortions, which Roe v Wade allows...in fact up to the point of labor.
just as it is between the genders, there are a few more similarities than differences among the spectrum of people who lean left or right, and the labeling of half or more of the nation as private-life-intruders for some perverse control need is just plain hysteria.
Obama has the full support of the Communist party so I am not surprised you are happy, Louise.
Wow, that wasn't necessary.
:-\
well thank you for asking, Brad. I voted for Obama because he had a clear and focused agenda for a) ending the war in Iraq b) restoring progressive taxation and eliminating corporate welfare and giveaways to the rich c) restoring the rule of law and closing Gitmo d) instituting health care reform e) supporting the middle class and sensible domestic economic policy f) he had good advisement from the best economic team available led by Paul Volcker, the SUCCESSFUL former head of the Fed g) he is not a Washington pol and h) he's honest and intelligent.
I dont' see that this would be 'insulting' to Louise...she self identified as a Socialist, and the Communists are left of socialists...so if Obama is doing enough to make them happy then it would follow that the socialists are happy.
dont' read stuff into my post and try to make it out to be more than it is.
Wow, that wasn't necessary.
:-\
I dont' see that this would be 'insulting' to Louise...she self identified as a Socialist, and the Communists are left of socialists...so if Obama is doing enough to make them happy then it would follow that the socialists are happy.
dont' read stuff into my post and try to make it out to be more than it is.
Interesting graphic, note how they just stttttrrreeettttcccchhhhhhhh that bad boy out so the Democrats somehow fall in the "middle of the road" there. I guess when your standing out toward the fringe, the center looks far away indeed. The actual political (but still mainstream)right must look like Antartica.
The wording alone is a bit of a tip off that theres a mite of prespective skewing going on,"New Empire Judeo-Christian Radical And The Lamb Opened the Seventh Seal Armageddon-Survivalists With Tinfoil Hats Etc." The opposition is always painted in broad brushstrokes with neon colors, but in fact, the outgoing Administration were garden-variety conservatives. This country wasnt even close to being a totalitarian state under GW Bush for all the hyperventiating. Plenty of room to his right. Plenty. Keep going, in fact, and you meet the extreme left, it hardly amtters at that point.
Thanks, Louise, that pretty much covers why I voted for him, too. I'd only add, He's not afraid to show his intelligence.
And isn't it funny? Once upon a time Republicans could be Progressive (think, Teddy Roosevelt).
actually there was a named "progressive" movement that was initiated that Roosevelt was part of, and its goals were governmental reform and the reduction of the dynamic of the two prevailing parties.
Compare that to the current GOP's big-business *ss-k*ss*ng.
I believe I'm with you here, Lynne. If you'll pardon the metaphor, to me abortion is like locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen.
If the "barn door" means a vagina, there's a horse in the barn that the owner didn't want there.