Where do the libs hangout?

[bomelia]

Nobody in Jefferson's time was a liberal as liberal is defined today.

Has anybody ever thought about the real reason why our tax code will never change to a flat tax or "fair tax?" Pols would not have a way to manipulate the electorate without our current system.

Mike

[VRM]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Nobody in Jefferson's time was a liberal as liberal is defined today.

Has anybody ever thought about the real reason why our tax code will never change to a flat tax or "fair tax?" Pols would not have a way to manipulate the electorate without our current system.

Mike

That's true, but there are liberals today who still agree with what the liberals in Jeffersons time thought. I suspect that Clay is one of them, and I am probably not that far off myself.

I kind of liked the tax plan I had under the what we would do as Prez thread. You get taxed on the value of what you buy, and big items like property, cars, and so on would be taxed annually.

[jhv48]

They're all in Washington DC. And most recently in the White House!

[clayfoushee]

Originally Posted by VRM

That's true, but there are liberals today who still agree with what the liberals in Jeffersons time thought. I suspect that Clay is one of them, and I am probably not that far off myself.

Yep, but personally, I think the labels have become pretty meaningless. They always have been. Exhibit A would be a "conservative," currently-sitting President, who has recently checked all the boxes to qualify as a card-carrying, "big government liberal."

Political campaigns are about idealism and what a candidate would like to accomplish in an ideal world. That idealism is necessary to motivate people to become involved.

However, after assuming an office, reality is reality, and campaign positions must be modified, unless the the office holder is in denial and/or not very smart. In a dramatically changing world, where there is no handbook or known recipe to fix a multi-generational set of problems, the silly labels of the past make no sense.

I'd wear the Jeffersonian definition of liberal as a badge of honor. Jefferson would likely have been the first to recognize those realities, and his own positions changed significantly over time. The literal definition "liberal" means being able to react to changing times and a willingness to change or reform. By definition, conservative means slowness or resistance to change, and clinging to what might have worked in the past. Thanks for the compliment.

[Fred Douglass]

...the "Sage of Monticello" was an avid supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, he loathed the concept of a strong, central (federal) gummint, he was unbelievably OTL re things naval (check out his brick forts and gunboats) and re things in Fwance....he also had some rather...ahem..."unflattering" things to say about black people. So.....in some areas he was very much a modern liberal (anti-military, closet racist* and exploitative [Hemmings] and a lover of violent revolutions*).....in others he was a conservative (small gummint, low taxes, trust in hoi polloi, guns, etc.). Mixed bag, I'd say.

Chow,

*check out where liberals send their kids to school when they're serving in DC....or check out the sociological/demographic history of Mattapan, MA in the last 4 decades!!!
**he LOVED the Revolution in Paris....until the heads started flyin', that is.....(ar, ar)

[bomelia]

Originally Posted by clayfoushee

Yep, but personally, I think the labels have become pretty meaningless. They always have been...

...I'd wear the Jeffersonian definition of liberal as a badge of honor. Jefferson would likely have been the first to recognize those realities, and his own positions changed significantly over time.

Labels are meaningless until you decide to wear one. And one based on the ideals of someone who has been MIA for over 200 years... so context is prolly an issue here.

Mike

[clayfoushee]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Labels are meaningless until you decide to wear one.

Mike

And, when you decide apply one to someone else.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Labels are meaningless until you decide to wear one. And one based on the ideals of someone who has been MIA for over 200 years... so context is prolly an issue here.

Mike

Mike, that is pretty funny...you are the one who titled this thread using a label. I also tend to see people on this site who define themselves as conservatives using those labels a lot, and generally in a bad or insulting way. By insulting libs as a general group you are insulting Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, and a bunch of other folks who do not deserve it.
None of them were perfect, and none of us are either (though some of you seem to think that I am), but Jefferson and others had some great ideas that are still valid 200+ years later. I do my best to emulate their better ones, and I think Clay does the same. Doing so frequently gets me a label of a lib on this forum, as well as as bunch of insults. Perhaps I am a bit more Jeffersonish than Clay as I will be an a$$hole to those who are an a$$hole to me.
If we apply generic labels to conservatives based on the same criteria you guys use for Muslims, gays, and liberals then you are all uptight closet homosexuals who are as militant about Christianity as the Taliban is about allah. You spend without taxing and blame your debt on others, you think that a guy having Hussein as a middle name is reason enough not to vote for them. You support torture, indefinite incarceration without due process, and you seek to limit the personal freedoms of gays. You promote the display of your religious items on public grounds, but I doubt you would be so accommodating to other religious groups wanting to do the same. You do not want sex education, but you do not want to allow abortions either. You want to invade Iran, but point to Australia when asked to locate it on a map.

Based on the actions of some conservatives it really looks like all of them are hypocrites that do not believe in anything America stands for except the right to keep and bear arms.