Are Conservative ideas based out of paranoia, and liberal ideas based out of optimism? (from "Liberalandproudofit.com")

Most of the controversy about Liberalism is not about its goals but its methods. Liberalism’s old adversary, Conservatism, argues that Liberals are impractical, starry-eyed, and batty. They say that our proposals are foolish and doomed to fail. Conservatism also argues that action by government will always fail because government is like an idiot brother-in-law. No
matter what you ask him to do, he does it wrong. Additionally, according to Conservative speakers, government is just an embryonic form of tyranny – like an acorn is an embryonic oak tree – and it will grow into a dictatorship if it is not kept weak from lack of power and anemic from lack funds. Finally, Conservatives argue that taxation is a form of theft or extortion, that all taxes are bad, that no new taxes should be imposed, and that all old taxes should be
repealed. What Conservatives say, of course, is not what Conservatives mean. What Conservatives say they are going to do is not, of course, what they are
planning to do. We all know that, hopefully, from long years of unkept promises by Conservative leaders.

Liberalism wants all levels of American government - federal,
state, and local - to be impartial, efficient, and frugal. It is unproductive for a Liberal
federal government to be at odds with Conservative, reactionary, or racist local
governments. It would be best if all levels of government in America pursued Liberal
goals. The primary concerns of every level of government should be (1) the security of
Americans, (2) the freedoms and rights of American citizens, (3) the equality of
Americans, (4) the overall prosperity of American citizens, and (5) the expansion and
maintenance of the national infrastructure (roads, power grids, dams, water supply,
airports, railroads, national parks, etc.).

If some part of government is broken, then let it be fixed. If some part of it is too
bureaucratic, then let it be made more efficient. If it pays too much for something, let
purchasing procedures for that item be reviewed. If old remedies have not worked, then
let new ones be designed. Capable, active, efficient, frugal governments are needed at all
levels of the American republic.

The stance of American Conservatism - to declare that government is broken and that
it should not or cannot be fixed - is a dishonest argument. The idea that government is
inherently broken and cannot be fixed actually has a respectable ancestry. No less than
Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and
government to gain ground." He suggested that government is inevitably and unalterably
on one side and Liberty is always on the other. No one should ever discount Mr.
Jefferson’s opinions without careful thought.

In the age of monarchy, in which President Jefferson lived, this was true. But even Mr.
Jefferson’s massive intellect could not imagine the times in which we live. Neither he nor
anyone else of his generation foresaw the future power of global corporations over
human life. He did not imagine an America fed by foreign harvests, whose consumer
goods are being produced by Communist China, whose daily welfare depends on the
invisible and unfriendly processes of the global oil market, whose children fall ill from
the lead paint coating their foreign-made Christmas toys, and whose very dog food is
occasionally tainted with Chinese antifreeze. He did not foresee the issues associated
with Internet censorship, DNA manipulation, disease control, market manipulation,
global price fixing, currency manipulation, access to medical care, international
terrorism, nuclear proliferation, worldwide pollution, the extinction of thousands of
species, and global warming. He did not suspect that a single corporation in Texas
(Enron) could, would, and did manipulate the cost of power for thirty million
Californians. It did not occur to him, in the Age of Monarchy, that any institution except
government would have the power to threaten the rights of free men and women to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Modern Conservatives have hijacked Mr. Jefferson’s noble, principled argument, and
they use it now as a cover for their real purposes: deregulation of their corporate sugar
daddies and opposition to federal civil rights activities. Let no one be fooled.
American Liberalism, on the other hand, has used government – especially the federal
government – as a change agent. Federal law and federal enforcement have been used to
end slavery; improve workplace safety; increase wages; increase worker benefits;
provide unemployment compensation; give women the vote; give minorities the vote;
end child labor; end lynching; provide access to medical care for children, pregnant
women, and the elderly; end all-White hiring policies by employers; provide equal pay for
minorities, provide equal pay for women; desegregate the southern states, desegregate
the armed forces, enable minorities to go to public schools with Whites; enable
minorities to go to college; provide scholarships and student loans; set a
minimum wage; provide transportation safety; build a national highway system; build dams for flood control and power generation; create air pollution standards, create food purity standards, create a national park system, create the eight hour work
day, the forty hour work week, and overtime; create paid sick leave, and paid
maternity leave; create the right to consult an attorney; etc. Imagine what
America would be like today if all of those initiatives by the federal
government had never taken place! Conservatives fought against every one of these changes: even including the abolition of slavery*, the abolition of
child labor, equal pay for women, anti-lynching proposals, and all the others!
Many of these reforms were delayed for decades by determined Conservative
opposition, particularly by Conservatives in the Senate. Against every one of these
reforms or actions, Conservatives used Jefferson’s powerful argument that government was incompetent, that it was becoming too powerful, that it could not be trusted, and that it was stepping outside its constitutional boundaries. Their concern, they said, was only with the Constitution. Obviously, their concern was not with any Constitutional issue at all. In reality, they used Jefferson’s argument as a smoke screen to hide their real goals.

For example, southern Conservatives argued against civil rights legislation to prevent
lynching because, they said, the Constitution reserved the punishment of crime to each
state, not to the federal government. Yet, Conservatives took no action at the state level to
prevent lynching, which they could have easily done – if they had really wanted to
prevent lynching.

Liberals see democratic government as a powerful tool for good. If not government,
then who or what will represent the rights and welfare of the average American against
the powerful and distant forces that have such a huge impact on his daily life? Will
Exxon protect average Americans? Will China? How about oil exporting nations like
Saudi Arabia and Russia? Maybe the toy manufacturers – who imported those toys and
sold them to our children without testing them – will stand up for our rights? Or maybe
the dog food manufacturers who imported the antifreeze-contaminated pet food without
testing it? Will the corporate lobbyists in Washington stand up for our rights? Of course
not.
If not our own American government, then who? If we expect our governments to
solve national problems, then those governments have to have the money and the
authority to take bold actions. How can we prevent our governments from becoming
tyrannical, like Jefferson predicted? The only check on government in a democracy is
ultimately the voters. It is your responsibility and ours to elect capable men and women
to Congress, and that is something we have not done well at all.

Conservatives only argue for "smaller government" when they are against whatever government is proposing. Whenever there is an idea using governmental power that conservative's like (such as stopping gay marriage, or wiretapping phones) they never complain about "big government." The largest expansion of government ever took place under one of our most conservative presidents, George W. Bush. Conservative's also argue against government spending, however if you look at each individual presidents on average, Conservative presidents have been known to spend more than Liberal presidents. There are 2 things conservative policies are based on: Paranoia and hypocrisy.

On top of all this, there is one area where conservatives want to use big government and liberals want to stay silent:

What should each person do and how should each person think and live?

Every American citizen will have to provide his or her own unique answer that question.
This is the single topic on which Liberalism is silent.