|
Norfolknet Politics, Opinions, and Rants of a Relevant Nature as Deemed by the Webmaster [Previous run, town election 2007] 
Now, in the wide spectrum of political
thought, I, with my conservative leanings fall on one side... conservative.
This side is often referred to as the "right"... or the "right wing". None
of these terms are bashing, and I take no offense when they are applied to
me, or to others of the same leanings. In fact, I take pride in my position,
and in the terms as they are used to describe me.
Now, on the other side of the political spectrum there are people... good
people, bad people, every kind of people. The people on the the spectrum who
are basically opposite to conservatives are referred to as being liberal.
They are also collectively referred to as the "left" or the "left wing".
Again, that is simply a classification, an adjective, which depicts their
positions on political thought relative to everyone else in the spectrum.
Referring to them as being liberal is not a bash. It is accurate.
[...]
Now, in terms of whether my description was accurate, I would suggest that
you might want to count the number of Democrats on Beacon hill... Then
count the number of Republicans. Then consider the voting records of all
involved, and try to decide whether or not the majority of these politicians
fall on the conservative or the liberal side of political thought. I think
that if you honestly do that, you will find that my description of "Beacon
hill liberals" was actually very accurate in terms of describing those who
spend our tax money. In particular, when referring to those politicians who
would want to expand state spending to encompass something new, like state
wide education... that is a classic liberal position.
So, with that said, if you simply want to bash me, as if I'm doing something
wrong... something evil... something needing to be banished from this
page... go right ahead. I am perfectly prepared to defend myself
intellectually with anyone who enjoys debating the facts on just about any
subject. Ok? That is, so long as debate is allowed.
[I am not happy that we've returned to this form of debate. I'm also unhappy at the amount of misinformation that abounds, but I suppose that will happen.
Neither of the terms "right wing" and "left wing" is judgement-neutral,
they are both used in a derogatory sense, with a
meaning of "extreme beyond reason." Some non-judgemental equivalents
are "left of center" and "right of center."
It is not meaningful to define liberals in terms of conservatives with a
narrow self-serving definition of conservatives. Here's the
equivalent from the other side:
"Liberals are those who believe that governments are created by populations in order to safeguard and better their welfare. They also believe that governments have limited, narrowly tailored powers and that in case of conflict between the people and their government, the people's rights should prevail. On the opposite sides are people who believe otherwise; they are called convservatives."My point is that with an arbitrary (and misleading and incorrect) definition, it is easy to then "conclude" that the other side is (insert pretty much any adjective here.) However, I did find it entertaining that by the above definition of conservative (fiscal conservative), George W Bush is more liberal than Bill Clinton was, but I already pointed out the flaws in the original the definition.
And finally, the phrase "tax and spend liberals" is only meaningful as a
derogatory term. Clearly, every government, liberal and conservative, must
tax to spend, whether the money is given to welfare queens or Halliburton.
DWL's comment that this was "bashing" was correct.
Anyone know where I can buy lemming nets? They are so cute!
[Wait, careful, stand back! They look like they're going to jump! - Wm.]
Norfolknet.com your community, on-line |
