I Am a Liberal Because...

[Havensdad]

Because Jesus was a liberal putting people first.

Actually Liberals put people last. If liberals put people first, they would be in favor of eliminating all the silly EPA regulations (in order to stimulate jobs and economic growth), domestic drilling, halting illegal immigration, oh....and abortion. It always kills me that liberals scream when you cut down a tree, but encourage you to murder your unborn baby...and even force others to fund it!

 

[glfredrick]

Liberals care about people to the extent that they can manipulate them and use them to further their own aims and goals.

 

[Skandelon]

Liberals care about people to the extent that they can manipulate them and use them to further their own aims and goals.

Kind of like the Calvinistic view of God in some ways, huh? Do you think God cares about people in the same manner liberals do, because they sound ironically similar to me.

 

[Salty]

I really thought this was going to be an interesting thread. I really wanted to see the explanations folks would give as the reason they believe themselves to be a Liberal.

However, it appears most folks who posted mis-read the title as "Why I think a person is a libera."

I would venture to say no more than three individuals actually answered the OP.

Would it be possible for the conservatives NOT to post - and let the liberals actually expalin themselves? I really would like to know.
(-for you conservatives -then if you see a major point - start a new thread)

and now back to the orginial thread:

I am a liberal because...

Anyone of the Leftish persuasion care to share?

You may have the ability to meet this conservative's need to understand the reasoning behind the political viewpoint.

 

[Eric B]

He should be blamed.

He shouldn't have bailed them out. But they own him.

That's his fault.

Didn't the rationale used to be that corporations should be taken care of, since this will encourage them to create jobs, lower prices, etc?
It was feared that those banks and auto giants failing would bring the rest of the economy down with them. (Which seems to be happening anyway. No matter what we do; the outcome is the same).

It shows how dependent on those institutions we are, and that they in fact wield just as much power over us as the government. So yes, they own just about all the politicians. That's precisely what Poncho has been pointing out.

 

[mandym]

Didn't the rationale used to be that corporations should be taken care of, since this will encourage them to create jobs, lower prices, etc?
It was feared that those banks and auto giants failing would bring the rest of the economy down with them. (Which seems to be happening anyway. No matter what we do; the outcome is the same).

<-----This does not lead to

this-------->

It shows how dependent on those institutions we are, and that they in fact wield just as much power over us as the government.

Does not lead to this---------->

So yes, they own just about all the politicians. That's precisely what Poncho has been pointing out.

Flawed and paranoid logic

 

[Eric B]

Why is that?

 

[carpro]

Didn't the rationale used to be that corporations should be taken care of, since this will encourage them to create jobs, lower prices, etc?
It was feared that those banks and auto giants failing would bring the rest of the economy down with them. (Which seems to be happening anyway. No matter what we do; the outcome is the same).

It shows how dependent on those institutions we are, and that they in fact wield just as much power over us as the government. So yes, they own just about all the politicians. That's precisely what Poncho has been pointing out.

The strength of capitalism is that poorly run non competitive businesses die.
This president didn't save GM because he loves corporations. To the contrary, he hates them. He is owned completely by labor unions and he interfered in the natural business process to save the UAW. No other reason at all.

Even after stiffing investors and vendors for billions of dollars, GM will still fail eventually. Labor unions can't successfully run a business anywhere except into the ground.

 

[Eric B]

OK, then what about the other bailout; the banks? I don't think the unions are controlling them.