liberals

Google it yourself. I don't want to be accused swaying anyon....

Originally Posted by angiefox10

liberals

Google it yourself. I don't want to be accused swaying anyon....

Trust me, you are swaying NOBODY !!!!

What point is it that you attempt to make ???

In my humble opinion, like many other things, "liberals" or what ever from days of old have not one thing in common with today's assertion of what constitutes a liberal or liberalism!!!

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

In my humble opinion, like many other things, "liberals" or what ever from days of old have not one thing in common with today's assertion of what constitutes a liberal or liberalism!!!

btk

You are right BTK....I am shocked by anyone who feels that liberals and conservatives or Democrats and Republicans are the same as they were, say in the 60's !

I was very active in the Democrat party in the 60's and early 70's but left as they sped hell bent to the hard left....not my cup of tea and today, the Soros;s of the world control that party. Not the same.

Classical Liberalism is not today's American "welfare liberalism".

"Classical liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets.

Classical liberalism developed in the 19th century in Europe, and the United States. Although classical liberalism built on ideas that had already developed by the end of the 18th century, it advocated a specific kind of society, government and public policy required as a result of the Industrial Revolution and urbanization. .......

...It drew on the economics of Adam Smith, a psychological understanding of individual liberty, natural law and utilitarianism, and a belief in progress. Classical liberals established political parties that were called "liberal", although in the United States classical liberalism came to dominate both existing major political parties. There was a revival of interest in classical liberalism in the 20th century led by Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.

Some call the late 19th century development of classical liberalism "neo-classical liberalism," which argued for government to be as small as possible in order to allow the exercise of individual freedom, while some refer to all liberalism before the 20th century as classical liberalism.[6] Libertarianism is a modern form of neo-classical liberalism.[7]

The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism. Some conservatives and right-libertarians use the term classical liberalism to describe their belief in the primacy of economic freedom and minimal government.

...Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual, with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. According to Alan Ryan, the ideology of the original classical liberals argued against direct democracy, where law is made by majority vote by citizens, "for there is nothing in the bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of property or maintain rule of law.".........

.....According to Anthony Quinton, classical liberals believe that "an unfettered market" is the most efficient mechanism to satisfy human needs and channel resources to their most productive uses: they "are more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government." ........

.....Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable, and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights: "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature—rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism or welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others.

Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are "hostile to the welfare state."[17] They do not have an interest in material equality but only in "equality before the law". Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

I no longer have a point...

Thank you for asking and if anyone will listen I would be glad to answer.

I didn't come on here to argue a point... I didn't come on here to prove who had the better president! People would be surprised to know how little I care about the arguments they are having. Yes *sigh* I got hooked in the middle them, but I digress....

What I care about and posted on in the beginning were....

How do you feel about the SS and Medicare issue? I've heard some of the republicans say they want to do away with it. I posted links to that affect. (no, I'm not trying to put the republicans down and I don't want to debate who caused what) We can point fingers all day and it would prove NOTHING. Both parties have made mistakes. Did they do it to run the country in the ditch?? Of course not. OK.. I digress again.... People here want to support or put down Mr. Obama. I don't care *shrug* I care about me and my money!

I was very upset about the debt ceiling issue. I didn't give much thought to the republicans turning their backs on their own plans, until my 401K start bleeding! NOW I care!

As to who made the bigger debt??? You know what??? the debt has been going up since the beginning of time and until someone told me it was going up... I didn't even know, nor in all honesty, did I care. Where I live we were hiring, mfg was hiring, white collar was hiring, my husband can't hire enough people... Mfg was up, car sales were up, the stock market was going up... I think you get the picture. Now... congress gets in a fight to prove how bad it is.... Well guess what folks... Market is down, orders in mfg are going away, people are afraid to shop. I don't care what you think about Mr. Obama. I don't care that his parents gave him a middle name that bothers you! I care about me, my money and my children....

A little history... I liked Mr. Bush. I didn't like the wars, but I did like him. I liked him better then Gore. Mr. Obama wasn't my first choice but I wasn't crazy about Ms. Palin and he did promise to get us out of the wars... He didn't! I agree with some of these people more then they know. But as soon as they know you are "liberal" they want to argue!

Do they really believe EVERYTHING their candidate did was right? really? Because I don't. And no don't insult me for that because they are all human!

I would like to post my REAL concerns again... and get honest discussions. Would it be too much? I would like to REALLY discuss the points without trying to prove someone wrong.

I don't agree with everything everyone says... but I have changed my mind on many things just by reading and listening. I read Mr. Becks book and changed my mind about gun control.

When I am screaming PROVE ME WRONG!!!! I really mean it. Show me what I don't know! I was trying to make someone mad enough to prove me wrong. All they want to do it talk about how horrible Mr. Obama is. Really??? Because I really don't get some of this. I must be missing something.

Do you know since I started posting these nonsnense stuff... three people have asked me what I want... and thank you.

Could we all put down our weapons and discuss?

Oh and BTW. The chirping on the other thread was REALLY funny... I love that!!! I love the humor in the threads. I get it!

I am sorry...I missed the links to " I've heard some of the republicans say they want to do away with it. I posted links to that affect."

Can you repost them or summarize what Republican said they want to DO AWAY with SS and medicaire !

Thank you

This forum wears me out....

It really does take my energy away! I'm trying to understand. Every question isn't a challenge. Sometimes it's just a question. I don't care how anyone feels about Obama.

OK... Obama has a different last name. Forget about the race card as he is half white. He didn't end the war. Whatever you want to say... and as with any president... You are RIGHT!!!!

Now.... Can we go on. Can we discuss this? Mr. Bush said he knew where Mr. Obama was coming from. He said he had lofty goals as well and no one knows until they get into office how hard it is.

You are ALL right!!! Now.. *sigh* can we discuss? Can people understand that free thinkers really can see both sides if it's presented and sometimes we can change our minds.

I've seen many of us on here and no one will believe that we are listening. While we may not always agree with you... we can learn at least where you are coming from .

They have done studies on the brain... We are wire differently... Liberals will be liberals and conservatives will be conservatives. But we can still try to see the other side. Or at least that's what I want to do.

Originally Posted by angiefox10

This forum wears me out....

It really does take my energy away! I'm trying to understand. Every question isn't a challenge. Sometimes it's just a question. I don't care how anyone feels about Obama.

OK... Obama has a different last name. Forget about the race card as he is half white. He didn't end the war. Whatever you want to say... and as with any president... You are RIGHT!!!!

Now.... Can we go on. Can we discuss this? Mr. Bush said he knew where Mr. Obama was coming from. He said he had lofty goals as well and no one knows until they get into office how hard it is.

You are ALL right!!! Now.. *sigh* can we discuss? Can people understand that free thinkers really can see both sides if it's presented and sometimes we can change our minds.

I've seen many of us on here and no one will believe that we are listening. While we may not always agree with you... we can learn at least where you are coming from .

They have done studies on the brain... We are wire differently... Liberals will be liberals and conservatives will be conservatives. But we can still try to see the other side. Or at least that's what I want to do.

Can you supply the links to the Republicans calling for doing away with SS and medicaire ?????

This thread seems aimless to say the least. Founding fathers?

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...088599,00.html

http://chestertontribune.com/Busines...ges_to_cut.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqScu...ature=youtu.be

I read one person's response that he was OK with it because he was locked in at 55... Then my question was.. Who was going to fund it if people 55 and younger were not paying in.

I question why they don't take the cap off. The cap is at $106.000... If they take the cap off, that was help as well. Telling stories out of school, but my husband makes more then $106,000 and says he wouldn't care if the cap was off.

I personally like Ron Paul (no I don't wan to hear from the Ron Paul haters) He doesn't want to do away with is but has suggested a plan that people can decide for themselves if they want to opt in or not. How would people feel about that?

To the admins... Please give me some leeway in this thread as it is my thread and I am the one going off topic... please... I have someone who will discuss... and I appreciate it.

What has this do do with the Founding Father's Liberalism?

The Republicans want to break the Medicare covenant we’ve had in place since 1965.

The covenant is simple and fair. Americans work all their lives, pay their taxes, provide for their families, and then get to retire with dignity. Medicare provides us with medical care in our later years, after we’ve paid for it all our lives through taxes.

Now Republicans want to take away Medicare’s guarantee of care from anyone who turns 65 more than ten years from now. And they aren’t even doing it to pay down the deficit (it wouldn’t help much anyway). Because, according to the Congressional Budget Office, their big plan wouldn’t cut the deficit or debt over the next ten years.

No, they’re doing it to cut taxes dramatically for the richest Americans, which are already near historic lows. And they’re doing it by replacing Medicare’s guarantee of care with vouchers that will only guarantee big profits for their friends in Big Insurance. It’s both immoral and fiscally irresponsible.

There’s only one way to understand the Republicans’ budget plan—voted for by all but four House Republicans. It’s a naked, unapologetic attack on American working families for the sake of Big Insurance and the richest of the rich.

It abolishes Medicare’s guarantee of medical care for Americans over 65, throwing them at the feet of Big Insurance.
It uses that money to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans below their already historic lows—down to 25%.
It leads to bigger debts and deficits over the next decade, according to the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

After we fought long and hard to get health insurance for millions more working Americans, Republicans want to take it away at the end of our working lives. It’s pulling the rug out from under all the hard work we achieved on health care reform.

Originally Posted by buggyone

The Republicans want to break the Medicare covenant we’ve had in place since 1965.

The covenant is simple and fair. Americans work all their lives, pay their taxes, provide for their families, and then get to retire with dignity. Medicare provides us with medical care in our later years, after we’ve paid for it all our lives through taxes.

Now Republicans want to take away Medicare’s guarantee of care from anyone who turns 65 more than ten years from now. And they aren’t even doing it to pay down the deficit (it wouldn’t help much anyway). Because, according to the Congressional Budget Office, their big plan wouldn’t cut the deficit or debt over the next ten years.

No, they’re doing it to cut taxes dramatically for the richest Americans, which are already near historic lows. And they’re doing it by replacing Medicare’s guarantee of care with vouchers that will only guarantee big profits for their friends in Big Insurance. It’s both immoral and fiscally irresponsible.

There’s only one way to understand the Republicans’ budget plan—voted for by all but four House Republicans. It’s a naked, unapologetic attack on American working families for the sake of Big Insurance and the richest of the rich.

It abolishes Medicare’s guarantee of medical care for Americans over 65, throwing them at the feet of Big Insurance.
It uses that money to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans below their already historic lows—down to 25%.
It leads to bigger debts and deficits over the next decade, according to the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

After we fought long and hard to get health insurance for millions more working Americans, Republicans want to take it away at the end of our working lives. It’s pulling the rug out from under all the hard work we achieved on health care reform.

Oh yea, Republicans are doing all these evil things knowing that the elders of this land do the majority of the voting. What kindof snake oil are you selling?

Originally Posted by buggyone

The Republicans want to break the Medicare covenant we’ve had in place since 1965.

The covenant is simple and fair. Americans work all their lives, pay their taxes, provide for their families, and then get to retire with dignity. Medicare provides us with medical care in our later years, after we’ve paid for it all our lives through taxes.

Now Republicans want to take away Medicare’s guarantee of care from anyone who turns 65 more than ten years from now. And they aren’t even doing it to pay down the deficit (it wouldn’t help much anyway). Because, according to the Congressional Budget Office, their big plan wouldn’t cut the deficit or debt over the next ten years.

No, they’re doing it to cut taxes dramatically for the richest Americans, which are already near historic lows. And they’re doing it by replacing Medicare’s guarantee of care with vouchers that will only guarantee big profits for their friends in Big Insurance. It’s both immoral and fiscally irresponsible.

There’s only one way to understand the Republicans’ budget plan—voted for by all but four House Republicans. It’s a naked, unapologetic attack on American working families for the sake of Big Insurance and the richest of the rich.

It abolishes Medicare’s guarantee of medical care for Americans over 65, throwing them at the feet of Big Insurance.
It uses that money to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans below their already historic lows—down to 25%.
It leads to bigger debts and deficits over the next decade, according to the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

After we fought long and hard to get health insurance for millions more working Americans, Republicans want to take it away at the end of our working lives. It’s pulling the rug out from under all the hard work we achieved on health care reform.

You see... This is what scares me. I read somewhere that the insurance companies were behind it, but I could never find that to be true.

I would like to know who the four republicans were who voted against it. (I'll google it) I would like to look at them closer. I know I won't agree with everything they stand for... No one will... but right now my concern is my health care and my money.

I don't understand why the republicans aren't more concerned about this. There have got to be republicans who don't want to kill these programs that they could vote for and still stay with party lines if that is important to them.