Published: Friday, Oct. 19 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
conservatism today...the protection of accumulated assets transfered
from the middle class...arranged by sneering plutocrats.Perfect.
Liberalism teachs people that they have the right to produce nothing yet benefit
from those who do!
@Mountanman;Liberalism teaches people that they have a RIGHT to
enjoy some of the rewards for the things THEY manufacture, not just the business
owners.Conservatism teaches people that ONLY the business owners
have a right to the profits generated by the WORK of the industrious laborers.
@ Ranchhand. You are probably right! That's why welfare recipients are all
conservatives. Not! Liberalism needs "victims" to survive. That's
why we have Obamacare, re-disribution and food stamps, for the
Mountainman is fighting a straw enemy. I'm a liberal and all I want is to
NOT be a poor, powerless, begging slump that conservatism has always made out of
men. Conservatives favorite em0loyees are the powerless, desparate of China. The
wealth of the world was not meant to be hoarded by a few people.You
can't deserve more than you need any more than you can deserve salvation.
Had president Obama proposed an LBJ style agenda, Mr. Gerson and his political
allies would be calling him a communist.
Today's liberalism is yesterday's moderate conservativism. Which means
today's conservativism is what? Whatever you want to label it, it is
extreme, certainly something Ronald Reagan could never have supported.
Freedomingood. If you don't want to be poor, don't be! Develop job
skills and market them to the highest bider employer! Liberalism always creates
dependancy and more poverty! That's the difference and it is no straw
Liberalism is alive and well, even in right wing Utah. Over the past 40 years
conservatives and the republican party have sought, with too much sucess, to
demonize liberals, who believe that goverment can and should be a positive
factor in advancing the condition of those less advantaged. They call them
Socialist (which has been turned into an evil word). The demonize liberals by
suggesting that they are all anti family, anti religion, and anti traditional
values. They call them "tax and spend liberals" when the truth is that
more spending has been done since Reagan by conservatives than by liberals.
They call them big goverment idealogs when the biggest expansion of government
has actually occured more under so called conservative Republicans.We need not worry about Liberals, they will always be around to push for
change when change is needed. And we will always have conservatives to keep
Liberals from giving away the store. But I wish that conservatives would be
less mean spirited about it. I see so much meaness in some of these editorials
and right wing comments, and even hatred.
There is good news and bad news for Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid etc. The good news
is: God is a liberal. The bad news is: He votes Republican.
Gotta love it when a repub reports on liberals. It's like going
to a Baptist minister to learn about Mormons.
I agree with the premise of the article. Proper liberalism has given way to soft
conservatism. The democrats had the chance to step on the republicans'
throats for a while and blew it. We should have single payer health care now.
Funding for the endowment for the arts, the FDA, EPA and most other departments
should be secure by now, all of it at the expense of military spending. A lot of
things should be better than they are, but history and mission creep has a way
of taking us off track.
There is no direct relationship between liberal thinking and liberal politicsTherein lies the probelm
Perhaps the most telling belief of the new extreme conservative movement is
"American exceptionalism," which is just another name for nationalism
and is very different from patriotism. Nationalism brought the world such
wonderful gifts as Nazi Germany. Nationalism is also very good at labeling other
groups who disagree with their agenda. The label "socialist" certainly
comes to mind.
As a Liberal American I tend to think of people as being the important issue of
the world. I like the American creed that says that all people are equally
important and should be afforded equal opportunity to succeed in the quest of
the good life. Conservatives seem to think of people in the same
way in which a farmer regards his cattle.People in the conservative
picture are to be nurtured, guided and used according to the purposes defined by
so-called enlightened leaders. While both promote the idea that a
person has success mostly according to his own efforts, conservatives seem to
place more obstacles in the way of a person than do liberals. Conservative
define the end of equal opportunity at birth whereas liberals would like to
extend the equal opportunity further along a persons life. Liberals
might believe that necessities of life like the availability of food, clothing,
health care, education and such should not be the fault of the person and only
the extra effort for success beyond existence should count for success. It
comes down to being fair about the distribution of equal opportunity.
You know, as a liberal, there's nothing I like more than having a
conservative point out what he thinks I should believe in. It's almost as
fun as when a Baptist tells me, a Mormon, what he thinks Mormons should believe.
"Back in the day, you guys believed in marryin' lots of females. That
was way better! Made you SO much easier to attack!" Thanks, pal.
"....the Obama agenda also reflects a broader shift in American liberalism,
which has become reactive." - Michael Gerson__________That's necessarily so, Mr. Gerson. Liberalism became programmatically
defined beginning in the 1930s providing a visible and vulnerable target for its
opposition. Hence, liberalism's legacy is now endangered by conservatives
who would rescind much of its hard-earned victories. But if conservatism, as
classically defined, is defense of the status quo, then liberalism has truly
become the new conservatism of our times, tasked with defending and reinforcing
its gains for posterity.
Liberalism is alive and doing very well, thank you very much. Looking back at
the movement in the 50's and 60's, you see great progress being made
in changing actions. That part was reltively easy because the actions were
heinous and had very visible effects on the victims of racism, sexism,
environmental degradation, etc.Today's the actions are not as
overt and liberalism is striving to change thoughts and beliefs. That is much
harder work and the results can take a generation or two to show results.We are still here. We are still committed. And we are stll changing
To "Wanda B. Rich" you are wrong. Todays liberalism is even further
left than before.Today's liberalism is yesterday's
Communism. Just look at the reactions here. You have comments here ranging
from advocacy of striping businessmen of ownership of their businesses by giving
their employees the "RIGHT to enjoy some of the rewards for the things THEY
manufacture". You also have people stating that people have the right to
healthcare, food, clothing, and housing.All a worker has a right to
is their time. They do not own the business they work for, nor do they own the
equipment they use. They sell their time, and are compensated for it. If they
don't like the compensation rate, they are free to find new employment.If a person doesn't want to work, do they deserve food, clothing,
and shelter?If you want to look at who wants to help people the
most, just look at the last 100 years of liberal acts. They gave us segregation
in the military and Jim Crow laws. They also blocked integration in schools,
and did not support civil rights like conservatives did.
What societal problem has government ever solved? Do we have less
poverty in America than we had when FDR told us that government was the
solution?Do we have less poverty in America than when LBJ gave us
the "Great Society"?Do we have fewer unwed mothers?Do we have fewer drug addicts?Do we have fewer people on
welfare?Just what has government done with our money?What progress has been made?Is it possible that government is not
the solution, but that it is the problem?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments