READ THE DEFINITION AND DECIDE: - 1a. 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.
2006-06-23 04:52:08 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The reality of it is that liberal leadership is excatly what got us into this mess in the first place. What people don't seem to understand is that muslim fundamentalism is the anthithesis of anything liberal at all. They view liberalism as evil, and see the United States as a champion of liberalism, and is thus a champion of evil ideals.
I do not agree. I believe everyone should be free to make their own choices. Fundamental Islam, would strip us of all of our civil liberties and have us praying to Allah, 7 times a day, covering our women up, killing gays, Jews, Christians, and Blacks, censoring our papers, strip us of freedom of speach and so on. So while these are the rights we are fighting to protect, it is not the style of government that would win this war. These people respond to an iron fist, not a bleading heart, that being the case we must pound them into the ground with our conservative iron fist, so that we and those that want it are free to make our own choices.
2006-06-23 05:04:32 · answer #1 · answered by curious1 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sorry sport - liberal "leadership" is exactly what got us into this mess.
If the sissy liberals scream loud and long enough they think we'll forget all the lost opportunities to grab Bin Laden after he tried to topple the towers the first time.
But alas, our memories are longer than some burnt out pot smoking 60's wannabe.
After 20 attacks on US targets - enough was enough.
2006-06-23 11:59:43 · answer #2 · answered by never_touched_her 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If by "'Liberal' Leadership" you mean the current run of liberal Dimocrats, then no. That definition of liberal belongs to the Libertarian party and I want it back.
If you mean the kind of leadership available under the definition you gave, which would mean a Libertarian, then yes. I know we can.
2006-06-23 12:40:31 · answer #3 · answered by johngjordan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Liberal leadership? There's an oxymoron!
2006-06-23 23:22:56 · answer #4 · answered by Mom of One in Wisconsin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Will the current administration get us out of this mess? No, because they would never see that it is a mess. In terms of the war, they would just say 'It is Biblical' and that justifies all.
2006-06-23 12:26:18 · answer #5 · answered by Lou 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Liberals are the biggest bunch of PUSS1ESin the world. they never take a stand and are all basically smelly hippies!
2006-06-23 11:57:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
by your definition Liberals would be out immediately...
They are neither of any of above
2006-06-23 11:56:50 · answer #7 · answered by smitty031 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋