Liberal in Social Issues but Conservative Financially....How is this possible?
Options
nujerz84
Members Posts: 15,418 ✭✭✭✭✭
This is something a lot of people say they are... I suppose as a way to give a safe cliched politically correct answer when asked where they stand politically without seeming too far right or too far left.
My thing is how can one be Liberal on Social Issues and Conservative financially without being hypocritical?
So on issues of job creation/unemployment, healthcare and education the liberal view would be something like free/affordable healthcare and education with jobs that pay well.
In order to do so the government be it local, state and federal would have to come up with plans to finance these things...if you conservative financially then you would be against raising taxes, raising pay rate and/or government funding these programs.
I suppose ? marriage is the only "social issue" where this is possible... Fighting Poverty means better education and jobs as well any programs to help those that maybe struggling with substance abuse etc...
So what say you?
My thing is how can one be Liberal on Social Issues and Conservative financially without being hypocritical?
So on issues of job creation/unemployment, healthcare and education the liberal view would be something like free/affordable healthcare and education with jobs that pay well.
In order to do so the government be it local, state and federal would have to come up with plans to finance these things...if you conservative financially then you would be against raising taxes, raising pay rate and/or government funding these programs.
I suppose ? marriage is the only "social issue" where this is possible... Fighting Poverty means better education and jobs as well any programs to help those that maybe struggling with substance abuse etc...
So what say you?
Comments
-
Sounds a bit like Libertarianism
-
[img]https://scontent-a.? .fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/p480x480/997009_10152078078803118_677089716_n.jpg[/img]
[img]https://scontent-b.? .fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/p480x480/1487370_10152096584867726_1160365844_n.jpg[/img] -
this is roughly where i fall, so i mean, you can tell me where it doesn't work, but i find it really helps if you a) don't really give a ? about what a lot of people do and b) want people to stop ? with how you personally live
i mean, i suppose it depends on what you mean by "liberal" and "conservative" on the issues; i am the IC's #1 pro-gun guy, so i guess that's a "conservative social issue" to some, although i prefer to think of it as "wanting the government to stop ? with how i live" -
this is roughly where i fall, so i mean, you can tell me where it doesn't work, but i find it really helps if you a) don't really give a ? about what a lot of people do and b) want people to stop ? with how you personally live
i mean, i suppose it depends on what you mean by "liberal" and "conservative" on the issues; i am the IC's #1 pro-gun guy, so i guess that's a "conservative social issue" to some, although i prefer to think of it as "wanting the government to stop ? with how i live"
Careful Janklow, you might shoot your eye out with that thing.
Or build a bunker in rural Maryland.
Just make room for the bottled water and Spam between the arsenal. -
That GOAT political lifestyle apparently
-
-
i don't really care much for spam, to be honestTheManInBlack4.0 wrote: »Just make room for the bottled water and Spam between the arsenal. -
i don't really care much for spam, to be honestTheManInBlack4.0 wrote: »Just make room for the bottled water and Spam between the arsenal.
I've never had it.
I read it's the closest tasting thing to human flesh which led me to some questions left unanswered.
-
I had spam as a kid, I don't remember how it tastes though.
-
i ate some many years ago and you're not really missing out on muchTheManInBlack4.0 wrote: »I've never had it.
I read it's the closest tasting thing to human flesh which led me to some questions left unanswered.
-
Everything has a give and take. I feel we need a way to pay for things prior to starting them. I won't fight every raise in taxes but I expect the bill to be paid.
-
I dont see how it's not possible. I am a libertarian. I guess you can say I am "liberal" in the true sense of the word, classical liberal on social issues. At the end of the day I beleive in the principle of non aggression. I dont own you, your property or your body so who am I to tell you what to do? If you want be ? , ? dogs, smoke ? , or just live a peaceful life without anyone sticking a gun in your face, that is up to you. So as long as you dont interfere with my life, property, or ability to progress.
So ? marraige for instance. Why is that a government issue, at all? Marraige, from a legal stand point is simply a contract between 2 people (or more if you believe in that sort of thing). Government got involved in the early 1900's with tax credits and ? like that. Prior to that it was between yall and your church.
Drugs? That's your body. Religion, thats on you. Basically, "social issues" should not have a place in public policy.
Fiscally, I guess I am far more than conservative. I really believe in no taxes, or vouluntary taxes. I do not believe that government central planning is the best way to deliever public services. -
^^^ this guy gets it.
one thing that we should understand is that Americans corrupted the true meaning of many "original" terms including but not limited to "republican" (the American Republican Party is not truly republican) and "liberal" (the American Democratic Party is not truly liberal).
"Liberal" simply means freedom. Freedom across all boards whether socially or economically. Since the age of man, the opposite of liberalism - slavery, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, monarchism, feudalism and serfdom, dictatorship, empires, etc. - was (and continues to be to an extent) the dominant status quo. Liberalism only began to have definitive success starting in the 17th century, including the founding of the United States. The term "liberal" was co-opted by the emergence of social liberals (especially FDR), who mixed liberalism with other philosophies. So in America, "liberal" exclusively refers to social liberalism, but it doesn't refer to either the original form of liberalism nor neoliberalism, both of which are opposed to social liberalism. In Europe, liberalism isn't nearly as corrupted and has largely maintained it's origins.
Many libertarians are the only ones who are consistent when it comes to liberalism because, like Solomon posted, they believe in freedom and choice across all boards. Constitutionalists are the same way because the Constitution was never designed to have the government regulate who you marry or what you smoke. Neither was the Constitution designed to micromanage the economy and your income.
Republicans apparently believe in economic freedom but not social freedom, and Democrats apparently believe in social freedom but not economic freedom. There's the hypocrisy, and many people know this. Many people are libertarians to a large degree and don't even know it.
"Liberal in social issues but conservative financially" or however you want to say it, it doesn't seem hypocritical when you know the history behind the terms. All these labels - "right," "left," "republican," "liberal," democratic," "conservative," etc. - have been so diluted that they don't really hold any weight, especially with truly consistent and principled political philosophies like libertarianism. -
i've said it before and i'll say it again: it's probably not even that cut and dry, since i bet we can find things under "social freedom" that Democrats are opposed toRepublicans apparently believe in economic freedom but not social freedom, and Democrats apparently believe in social freedom but not economic freedom. There's the hypocrisy, and many people know this. Many people are libertarians to a large degree and don't even know it.
-
i've said it before and i'll say it again: it's probably not even that cut and dry, since i bet we can find things under "social freedom" that Democrats are opposed toRepublicans apparently believe in economic freedom but not social freedom, and Democrats apparently believe in social freedom but not economic freedom. There's the hypocrisy, and many people know this. Many people are libertarians to a large degree and don't even know it.
True. Obama and company are against the use of marijuana, like the Republicans. It's funny because I, and many others, actually believe that mainstream Republicans and Democrats are far more similar than they are oppositional. The overall point is that both are imo far more inconsistent/hypocritical than many progressives, constitutionalists, libertarians, etc. -
there's also a thread of being statists/authoritarians/whatever first in both partiesTrue. Obama and company are against the use of marijuana, like the Republicans. It's funny because I, and many others, actually believe that mainstream Republicans and Democrats are far more similar than they are oppositional. The overall point is that both are imo far more inconsistent/hypocritical than many progressives, constitutionalists, libertarians, etc.
-
ConservativesConservativesConservativesConservativesConservativesConservatives
Sara palin-stupid ? idiot
Michelle bachman-stupid idiot
Anti abortion
Pro death penalty
Guns for the mentally insane
ConservativesConservatives
Glen Beck-? goats in the ass
Rush limbaugh- oxycontin popping ? head shaking ? boi
Conservatives
Smaller govt but we'll tell you what you can and cannot smoke, drink, or marry
ConservativesConservatives
-
not sure this is an accurate representation of anyone's political positionGuns for the mentally insane
-
Ted nugent does not support any background checks or mental record access for weapons.
-
this is not exactly what you claimed priorTed nugent does not support any background checks-
alright, let's have a quote or a cite or something? (not that he's a politician but still)-or mental record access for weapons.
-
-
here's the Nugent quote from the article:
"In this day and age of terminal apathy and soulless discontent, I adore anyone who is an activist and stands up for what he or she believes… My loving brother Jeffery is becoming one of those activists, and I salute the great man,” writes Nugent. “His recent opinion on his support for expanded background checks for firearms purchasers is dead wrong, however. Passing expanded background checks would do nothing to curtail or suppress thugs or psychos from accessing weapons and committing mass murder, carjacking, the nightly shootouts in Chicago or a gangsta shooting at the Mother’s Day parade in New Orleans."
...so Nugent doesn't support EXPANDING background checks. can i get a citation that supports your prior claim?
-
Nugents brother supports them ted nugent doesnt, his brother said its crazy to let people with mental illnesses have guns.
-
well, let me ask you again: could you find a quote of Nugent actually SAYING that?Nugents brother supports them ted nugent doesnt, his brother said its crazy to let people with mental illnesses have guns.
i read the article, dude: Nugent's brother supports "expanded background checks" and Nugent does not. this is not the same thing as the above claim.
-
Libertarianism
