Wife of Justice Clarence Thomas launched 'tea party" group

Status
Not open for further replies.
souggy said:
By "liberal," do you means classic liberalism (nowadays known as libertarians) or social liberalism?
Click to expand...

I knew the second he asked the question you would set the record straight....That's why I posted a joke...:lol:
 
TXgolfer said:
I knew the second he asked the question you would set the record straight....That's why I posted a joke...:lol:
Click to expand...

Gets confusing when socialists hijacked the terminology "liberals."

I don't blame them for changing their name to libertarians.

Just wish conservatives don't call themselves libertarians when they're STILL pro-military and pro-government spending (on business ventures that is)... which are not libertarian concepts.
 
Wirelessly posted

Oh no, conservatives ruin everything in America? All right, let get ruin of all conservatives and kick their asses! It'll be more fun! ;)
 
souggy said:
By "liberal," do you means classic liberalism (nowadays known as libertarians) or social liberalism?
Click to expand...

Ahhhh...two very different concepts.

(And before someone goes there: Social liberalism is NOT socialism or Marxism.)
 
souggy said:
Gets confusing when socialists hijacked the terminology "liberals."

I don't blame them for changing their name to libertarians.

Just wish conservatives don't call themselves libertarians when they're STILL pro-military and pro-government spending (on business ventures that is)... which are not libertarian concepts.
Click to expand...

Yep. They treat socialism, liberalism, and Marxism as if they were one and the same system and / or concept, and use the words interchangably. I have seen too many times where the objection is more to the sound or appearance of the word, because those objecting have no idea what concept is represented by the word.
 
It was liberals that got rid of monarchy, dictatorship, and absolutists.

It was liberals that created free markets economy hence making their countries extremely wealthy.

It was liberals that created civil rights for all.

It was liberals that created the separation of church and state concept.

It was liberals that give you religious freedom.

It was liberals that created equal rights for women.

Those are the reasons why I am a proud liberal!
 
jillio said:
Yep. They treat socialism, liberalism, and Marxism as if they were one and the same system and / or concept, and use the words interchangably. I have seen too many times where the objection is more to the sound or appearance of the word, because those objecting have no idea what concept is represented by the word.
Click to expand...

Many on the far right if not many conservatives do not seem to be able to differnate between factions of those who lean left.
 
shel90 said:
It was liberals that got rid of monarchy, dictatorship, and absolutists. All of the Founders were considered "liberals". Jeffereson was for a weak Federal government and was against government handouts. Not exact Obama's Liberal view.

It was liberals that created free markets economy hence making their countries extremely wealthy.

It was liberals that created civil rights for all. Civil Rights Act 1964
Voting by Party

By party
The original House version:[9]

Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:[10]

Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:[9]

Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]

Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

It was liberals that created the separation of church and state concept.

Founders again. Concept is a key term as well seeing that these words are not in the Constitution.

It was liberals that give you religious freedom. Do we really have religious freedom if children are prevented from exchanging Christmas cards at school?. Or if a fire stations is forced to remove a Christmas tree, While at the same time the ACLU fights for the rights of people to wear religious headgear while playing soccer in school? Classic liberalism allowed for religious freedom with the first amendment. An amendment for expression. Today's liberals attempt to block that expression.

It was liberals that created equal rights for women.

19th Amendment Senate vote for Adoption

Republicans 36 for 8 against
Democrats 20 For 17 against

Those are the reasons why I am a proud liberal!
Click to expand...

It's doubtful the Founders would even speak to Obama. They sure wouldn't have voted for him
 
Very well put, TXgolfer! All one has to do is to actually look at the history and voting results, a simple matter of verification here.
 
The thing is... Shel or Netrox weren't wrong... however those points are attributed to the wrong group of people.

Social liberalism was based on classic liberalism as an economic response to the Depression, however it has diverged so far from its roots... it's no longer the same.
 
souggy said:
The thing is... Shel or Netrox weren't wrong... however those points are attributed to the wrong group of people.

Social liberalism was based on classic liberalism as an economic response to the Depression, however it has diverged so far from its roots... it's no longer the same.
Click to expand...

That was the intended point of my post. Don't mistake this crap we see today with liberals of the past. JFK wouldn't even recognize the Democrats today
 
TXgolfer said:
That was the intended point of my post. Don't mistake this crap we see today with liberals of the past. JFK wouldn't even recognize the Democrats today
Click to expand...

Nor would Hubert Horatio Humphrey!
 
Last edited:
Today's republicans are hijacked by the religious right. Republicans back then were nowhere like Republicans today either.
 
netrox said:
Today's republicans are hijacked by the religious right. Republicans back then were nowhere like Republicans today either.
Click to expand...

I am sure today's Republicans would still vote for the 19th amendment and Civil rights...:lol: They would vote for health care if it was reasonable too. Looks like religion is creeping into your party too, better watch out. If health care dosen't pass in the house it will be because some democrats objected to the abortion provision
 
Neither one of the parties are the same as they were years ago. But then, neither is society. The parties have changed in values and representation because society as a whole has changed.
 
netrox said:
Today's republicans are hijacked by the religious right. Republicans back then were nowhere like Republicans today either.
Click to expand...

Agreed, Nixon is nothing like Huckabee since Nixon is very fiscally conservative.

Back in 70's, most republican was fiscally conservative but today is mostly combined of social and fiscal.

*ignore all kokonut's post*
 
Yes, most. The majority. The larger portion. A preponderance of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top