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repealed.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.

Political Cartoons of the week!

Liberal Ideals that will help improve society:

I made this list before Obama was elected. Fortunately, Many of these policies are already starting to be established thanks to democratic leadership...

• Stop spending wastefully. (I believe that some spending, however, is necessary such as Obama’s stimulus package). If government cuts back programs that do not work and starts to relieve its debt, we will all be able to pay less taxes

• Have government focus more intently on smaller areas than trying to dabble in almost everything. Spend only on a few select categories so government can run more efficiently.

• Some areas government should intently focus on are areas such as: education, health care, and the environment.

• Reform the education system, pay teachers more, put more government investments into the education system so public schools in poorer areas are the same quality as public schools in wealthy areas.

• Make health care available and affordable to everyone. It is a right, not a privilege.

• Government needs to be involved with environmental regulations. It cannot be left to the private sector.

• Instill a progressive tax code giving a large tax cut to the middle class that will strengthen our overall economy and eventually help both the rich and poor.

• End the war in Iraq by having a timeline. Close Guantanamo Bay and put convicted terrorists on trial while holding them in super-max prisons. Stop torture and stand up to American Values. Try to reach back out to our allies and restore our standing in the world.

• Continue fighting the War in Afghanistan and support Pakistan’s fight against Al Queda.

• Uphold personal freedom and liberties. Do not let government involved with over-censorship, and wire tapping phones.

• Put gun control laws in place but always uphold the second amendment.

• Remove religion from policy. Give equal rights to everyone and allow gays to marry. Do not let government take away a women’s right to choose.

• Have respect for the global world. Do not become the "world police" unless our security is in definite danger.

• Keep our borders secure and stop illegal immigration while opening more legal paths to citizenship.

• Elect people who are social servants and not politicians. Bring a new attitude to Washington and start helping American citizens, not political parties.

If you ask me, all of these things would eventually lead to a better America and a better world. These ideas will obviously not be easy to implement ... especially because of the conservative opposition. It will obviously take many years to truly change the way we approach politics and policies. Obama in office is a start. We should all do our parts to do the little things, such as community service, to make this more caring, prosperous, and free society a reality.

The top 10 most annoying conservative commentators

# 10 - Laura Ingraham

She is nasty, annoying, and uninformed.

#9 - Glenn Beck

More paranoid than anyone in the world. He should go hide in his bunker and stop freaking out (and crying) about his delusional fears. I will admit that I do think he is a good guy (unlike the rest of these people) but he is just an idiot at times.

#8 - Michael Savage

A radio talk show host who thinks "liberals have a mental disorder."

#7 - Mark Levin

well, just watch this:



#6 - Michelle Bachmann

An idiot clown. How did she end up in our government?!?



#5 - Karl Rove

Do I even need to explain? He created the worst president in history.

#4 - Sean Hannity

A coward. Someone who searches to dehumanize anyone who has different views than him

#3 - Bill O'Reilly

Someone who claims to be "independent" but is clearly a staunch republican who is so ignorant that it is not even funny- He lives in the No Sense Zone. He also has anger management problems... enjoy the video:



#2 - Rush Limbaugh

No comment. Not even one.


#1 - Ann Coulter.

I really think she is evil.

Where I stand Politically

I am the red dot on the graph and apparently a Liberal Democrat/ Moderate Libertarian

Find out where you stand

Black, White, and Gray

Ive been reading a lot of conservative books lately and one that really stood out for me was
"Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levin

This book is a perfect example as to the way many conservatives think. It has been often said that conservatives see the world in Black and White and Liberals see the world in many shades of gray. This is extremely true, and is clearly seen through this book. Almost everything seen through the eyes of Mark Levin (and many other conservatives) are:

Good vs. Evil
Morality vs. Immorality
Liberty vs. Tyranny
Victory vs. Surrender
With us or Against us
etc...

In other words, in the eyes of many conservatives, there is NO middle ground (as stated recently by Dick Cheney)

The war on terror under Bush/Cheney also had an "us vs. them" mentality. Bush once stated that you are "either with us or with the terrorists" ... obviously this is not true. There are many people in other countries who do not respect the U.S. for its choices but would never support the terrorists. These people would end up in the "middle ground" or in the gray area (the area not seen by conservatives).

Even Bush believed he was on a religious crusade against evil and he thought he was acting as "good." The world is not as simple as just 2 sides. There are many facets, views, perspectives, and opinions. There is more than "I am right and you are wrong."

Unfortunately, I do not think Mark Levin sees the world or society in this way. He instead believes that if you are not successful you must be "lazy" and that if you do not believe in torture, you must agree with the terrorists. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to better understand the perspective of many conservatives:

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243480703&sr=1-1