Can some decient middle of the road liberals give me some reason why they feel the way they feel?

Question

Abou the War, Immigration, Health care, Fairness Doctrine... I don't care I would just like to know there are some well thought out points of veiw besides Bush lied kids died. Or that I am just an evil conservative hatmonger.

Please conservatives don't bash liberals in this question.

I may not agree with you but I would genuinely like to hear some of the other side.

I do listen to Air America. I don't agree with about 90 % of what they say. And that really is against the spirit of the question.

Some good answers. I really like Twisted's answers. I don't agree but I can understand. On Abortion I feel about the same way on Govt shouldn't make laws prohibiting but then again I don't want abortions to be legal after the third trimester. I think at that point adoption should be a better option.

The Fairness Doctrine was a rule that all controversial views had to share equal time for both sides on air. The Supremem courts decreed it inhibitedfree speech. Diane Feinstein, Dick Durbin and John Kerry have talked about bringing it back, but in their version as I understand it. It will only affect talk radio.

Answer 1

I have no political affiliation, but I do hold liberal views on some issues, just as I hold conservative and moderate views on others. As for my liberal views, I give you a few and try to explain why I believe as I do

1) Health Care
I believe that health care is a right, not a privilege based solely on your socio-economic status. Although, I accept the fact that currently there is not a fiscally viable option available to enact a national health care system. Furthermore, there is not enough support for any one specific plan to make it into law.

2) Abortion
Personally I have never had an abortion, nor will I ever. That being said, I do not believe that the government, whether at the state or national level, has any rights when it comes to personal medical or moral decisions.

3) War
I do not believe that we should have invaded Iraq in the first place. The government has known about the wmd since before the first Gulf War. If we had taken care of the problem then, We would now be in the position to focus our resources where they should have stayed in the first place, dealing with Osama bin Laden and al Qeada. However, now that we are in Iraq, I do believe we should finish what was started, even though it was started for the wrong reasons.

Answer 2

The war..what can I say. It is just the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place, with the wrong objectives. Torturing people didn't help. The war now seems more like a private enterprise (and average joe ain't getting nothing).

Immigration...America needs immigration, The dollar is worthless, more people (with less money) puts downward pressure on inflation. Nobody can say this though, because americans will realise that the whole economy of america is infact poverty dependant, and they might start getting sympathy for the poor, or realising the American dream is just a load of crap. America is as poverty dependant as every country on earth. Feeling self important (or moralising at the poor) doesn't change a damn thing.

Health Care, America will never have a "Universal healthcare system", and the debate is at the wrong time. War and Global Warming are too important.

Americans are too selfish a people, and it has never been devestated to be in a position to look after or care about their neighbours.

Oh and you don't have politicians worth a damn, people like Aneurin Bevan (in Britain) - real political heroes, massively intelligent - to either set it up or run it...and Micheal Moore pretending to be him looks a bit silly. Best of luck though.

Fairness Doctrine..America is poverty dependant..enough said.

Answer 3

Bush himself said that we should not be involved in nation building when he was running for president the first time. He was right then. We ignored the advise of some of our staunchest allies in going into Iraq. And that Bush lied is extremely valid ..just as it was when LBJ lied about getting us involved in Vietnam by way of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Sen. Byrd from W. Virgina was a prophet when he gave the reason he was voting against the authorization of force in Iraq when he said what a huge mistake he had made voting FOR the Gulf of Tonkin resolution.

And what has Prez Bush accomplished aside from tax cuts that primarily worked for the very rich. Where is Bin Laden? Zawahiri? Why is the Taliban resurgent in Afganistan? No Social Security overhaul, No immigration reform. Ever major initive by the president has been kicked out by the congress and the american people as a whole.

I can go on but i will end right there.

By the way I am not a democrat but a libertarian.

Answer 4

Fair enough...

And may I add that I'm happy to see someone who isn't just spewing bile at the other side...

The war: Unfortunately there really isn't a good option regarding the war at this point. I honestly don't think that there's any chance that we will be able to stabilize Iraq in the forseeable future, and for that reason we probably ought to pull out. We're not accomplishing anything. Also Al Quaeda isn't going to take over Iraq (the Sunni's are not likely to be the winning faction in a civil war, and all Sunni insurgents aren't Al Quaeda agents to begin with...)

Health care: The health care system in the US doesn't work very well--we pay more per capita for care than any other country in the world and have mediocre health outcomes (though admittedly part of this is probably due to lifestyle choices). I'm not in favor of socializing US medical care, but creating some form of national health insurance seems reasonable--there's no reason why US corporations should foot the bill for healthcare as it makes them less competitive internationally, the US government already pays for medical care for the elderly to a significant degree, and many of the nations uninsured are young people in relatively good health who should be relatively cheap to insure.

Fairness: In general I support policies to help people who haven't been handed great cards in the game of life, and to ask those people who have gotten good cards to pay a bit more. If you make a million dollars a year you can afford to pay a higher proportion of your income to the government, and make life easier for a lot of poorer people who really need the extra money. Ensuring that the less fortunate also have access to education/healthcare etc also increases the liklihood that they'll be able to succeed in life.

Unfortunately its late, so I'm going to end it here. Best wishes.

Answer 5

War:
Saddam wasn't the problem and everyone knows it. The only reason Bush considered him one was oil supply.
Clinton warned Bush that Osama was the greatest threat to American security and Bush ignored him, presented fraudulent data to prove it to the UN and get support for the invasion. Saddam was there, because Reagan and his ilk supplied him well enough to defend himself from Iran.

Immigration
When people are born on American soil, they are Americans. NO IF ANDS OR BUTS ABOUT IT. and we either choose to break up families, or deny that people born on AMerican soil are Americans, just because their parents were not, and send them to their parents home country.
That includes a lot of people, and where does it end?
not many people in America today who didn't decend from immigrants who didn't have to obtain naturalization status.

Healthcare
Emergency rooms do not turn people away for treatment. When a person can't pay, we end up paying for it anyway(just 3X-6X the cost), in the form of higher healthcare costs to recoupe the losses, or from bankruptcies, which healthcare is the gratest cause of brankruptcy in the USA.

Fairness doctrine
sounds like newmax propaganda

Answer 6

I am not sure what to add here.

First of all, what is so 'liberal' about being against the war? The republicans were against bombing Al Queda when Clinton was president. Were they liberals?

Already, I believe 8 republican senators have said they no longer support the war. Soon, it will be more.

I think I have a question for you. Can you state what times Bush lied? Its not as easy as it sounds. It is one thing to give a general impression that Iraq was supporting Al Queda, its another thing to say it explicitly. Read 'Hubris' or 'State of Denial'. Its there.

The most famous incident of Bush lying, of course, was the speech tying Iraq to nuclear yellow cake. 'Hubris' makes clear that the CIA told the administration two prior times not to use that language because it was false. Clearly, it was a lie, and then the lied about covering it up, and the President lied the other day about saying 'there might be one or two people in my administration who leaked the name of Valerie Plame". In fact there were two: Armitrage and Rove as it came out in testimony.

Answer 7

Listen to Air America radio and get informed.