English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Liberal= "tolerant of change, not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition"

Conservative= "resistant to change; conforming to standards of the Middle Class"

Systems that cannot change or adapt to changing conditions are in danger of extinction. Liberals take a conservative view when it comes to natural resource allocation, which has been identified as the critical determining factor of a civilization's survival. Conservatives take a liberal view on several issues of importance to them. Whose middle class values are we supposed to be conforming to, anyway? If liberals are truly the enemy of the country, as so many claim, then why is the definition of "liberal" more aligned to long-term survival? Is anybody else concerned about the inability of both sides to reconcile, and the growing divide and hatred? Don't we need both?

2007-02-03 01:03:30 · 18 answers · asked by Hauntedfox 5 in Politics & Government Politics

My definitions are not off-base: they are straight from the dictionary!

2007-02-03 01:19:24 · update #1

Earnest, you scare me, especially if you are a PhD: haven't the most dangerous conditions arisen precisely when one side refuses to see value in anything the other side has to say? isn't the most inportant person in the room the one who disagrees with you?

2007-02-03 01:41:06 · update #2

To the person who rated Ruby a thumbs-down: at least she had something interesting to say. Whether or not I agree with all her points, she put more effort into thinking her stance through than 99% of the reactionary stuff I see on here!

2007-02-03 01:44:46 · update #3

18 answers

We could start out by putting term limits on every politician, which would bring fresh ideas into politics and how our government should be run. We can't move forward if all we get from our elected officials is the same old rhetoric over and over again.

Be assured that I'm talking about both parties.

2007-02-03 01:29:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The old saying "If you don't bet, you can't win." applies to this country as it stands now. Because of everything that has happened in the past few years, it is sure that a Democrat will be elected President, and a Democrat majority will control the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The terriorist will have their last gasp and make one final try for a good attack on the U.S. while Pres. Bush is still in office. They dare not do it when the Democrats are in control. If something does happen then, the whole nation will be united against them without question or protest. This will serve to pull us together in other ways as a natural course of events.

If you re-read the definitions you gave for conservative and liberal and study what has happened in the past few years or so, you will discover that the lines are blurred and at most, the opposition is to any ideas that one party has first, and the other is forced to think of an alternative to save face. This is the type of stupidity we must work to eliminate.

2007-02-03 01:20:20 · answer #2 · answered by John H 6 · 2 0

I think that the press could help a LOT.
The important stories, the ones that will change the world, are the imminent end of fossil energy and global warming.
If it were made clear that we have about 30 years left before we will have to figure out how to make windmills and solar panels run airplanes or stop flying, I think people could get TOGETHER behind solving this problem. Look at the mobilization the press created on social security by convincing Americans that it might have problems in 50 years, as an example.

If it were made clear that our children, if not us, could starve to death because we cannot grow crops, I think people could get together behind solving global warming.

But the press doesn't pay enough attention to these stories - especially the end of fossil energy. It's not because this is even debatable; the oil industry's own estimates are consistent with those advocating alternative fuels.

Everything else, from Brad&Angelina to terrorism, is an order of magnitude less important thatn these two things. We need to focus on the important problems, and being dispersed geographically, we depend on mass media to help us focus.

2007-02-03 01:20:18 · answer #3 · answered by firefly 6 · 1 0

All that matters is to find honest politicians with integrity and we don't have them on either side. The polarization does not matter because they both favor taking away freedoms in favor of a monster government created by the Republican 40% increase in spending last 12 years. We face a catastrophic depression risk if they don't quit spending to increase government girth per a recent warning from the Fed Reserve Chairman.

2007-02-03 01:14:00 · answer #4 · answered by Lighthearted 3 · 1 0

Your definitions are completely off-base. Liberals aren't tolerant - they want to take more of our economic freedom away. You might want to have anal sex. You should be allowed to. I want to keep more of my money. I should be allowed to. It's NOT different. It's just what you want to do versus what I want to do, and curtailing either is intolerance.

And the middle class has done remarkably better, and absolute economic mobility has improved dramatically, since we switched to a free market (some call it conservative) economic policy paradigm in the early 1980s. You can believe the BLS data or you can believe Al Franken on that one.

Far from "conforming to the middle class," conservative economic policy has resulted in a "shrinking of the middle class" as households have moved out - but the BLS data is clear that 92% of those households have moved UP while 8% have moved down.

I'll take 92/8 any day.

2007-02-03 01:11:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

More people need to see and take the World's Smallest Political Quiz. (The link is below.) Polarization happens when you believe there are only two choices: black and white, good and bad, republican and democrat. But there really are more choices than that, and there need to be. Both the two old political parties have been in power often enough and long enough, and supported the bureaucracy that continues from one administration to the other. It is time to see that we have better options.

Vote Libertarian for a change.

2007-02-06 02:43:04 · answer #6 · answered by auntb93again 7 · 1 0

Changing just for changes sake is what insane people do.

The last guy in the White House tried to convince America that the Constitution was a "living thing", something that could and should be changed every time our Congress sneezed. He tried to sell his idea with his statement, " It depends upon what your definition of IS is."

Changing the Constitution for no special reason would make it a worthless document and of no value at all,..a piece of paper for anarchists.

2007-02-10 01:51:56 · answer #7 · answered by Mr. Been there 4 · 0 0

People need to vote in moderate politicians who understand the need for balance and compromise. There's too much thinking today that these are weaknesses, not assets in setting out an agenda for the nation's policies. Most Americans fall in the middle of the spectrum, not far right or far left....but whether it's Bible-thumpers or ultra-hippies, they seem to want to take-over their respective party and enforce very orthodox policies that would actually hinder the rights and beliefs of the majority simply to reaffirm the values of the minority.

2007-02-03 01:08:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

You won't be successful in getting a Conservative to see common ground with a Liberal . There is none !!! Oh, I wish that big issues like National Security would be enough to unite us, but ask a Liberal about National Security and get amazed when they answer off-topic, with scorn and hatred .

But there is a way to 'reduce' the political polarization. . . . . . . . . Bush Plan works !!!!
Then.. . . . .after so many foolish Democrats have gone on record saying it won't, doom and gloom, and negotiate with madmen. . . . . .. . the Democratic Party will lose so many seats, they'll have effectively diminished their own party . It's coming soon too ! Bush is letting them spew their hatred and nonsense and waiting for all of them to be on 'record' for their views, and then . . . . . . . BAMM.. . . .. . . a HUGE surprise for all to see . Syria and Iran will be neutralized with an overwhelming bombing campaign destroying their ability to threaten us further . And Iraq CLEARED of Insurgents and the infighting stopped or significantly reduced .
MARK MY WORDS.. . . . It's coming in the next few weeks or months !!!

2007-02-03 01:19:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I hear people calling "Right Wing Conservative Republican" talk show hosts "Great Americans" - to me they are "Dangerous Americans" because they have caused the political and class polarization in America... They have dangerously convinced some that they actually believe the garbage they spew on a daily basis..... They Need To Stop!

2007-02-03 01:27:43 · answer #10 · answered by bugger 1 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers