Churchill swapped parties twice, swapped constituencies when he was defeated so as to get back into parliament immediately and chose his first party because his father's mates could get him adopted as a candidate. His plan was to do better than his father who was chancellor of the exchequer, and indeed he made it to PM. Whichever party he belonged to he was broadly a liberal. Introduced some of the first state pensions.I like the phrase, wrongly attributed to Churchill, "If you're not Liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not Conservative when you're 35, you have no brain." Like everything else in my life, I am bass akward on this remark, as I was a hard core conservative in my youth and have drifted left in my years.
Conservatism today refers to a desire to uphold the Classical Liberal philosophy of liberty for all . . .
It refers to no such thing. To reiterate just one example:
Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Final Voting
House of Representatives:
Democrats 235 for, 15 against
Republicans 15 for, 160 against
Senate:
Democrats 57 for, 0 against
Republicans 8 for, 31 against
"And Justice and Liberty for All." Right.
Conservatism today refers to a desire to uphold the Classical Liberal philosophy of liberty for all, not as a means for keeping the status quo as that clip implied.
Modern day Conservatism is often referred to as Classical Liberalism because liberalism in the 18th and 19th Centuries was synonymous with LIBERTY or FREEDOM. Conservatism today refers to a desire to uphold the Classical Liberal philosophy of liberty for all, not as a means for keeping the status quo as that clip implied. That was an outright lie. From the 20th Century onward liberalism is no longer liberal but often anti-Liberty and Freedom as most liberal politicians in both parties fall into the regulatory crowd who's desire is to impose restrictions wherever they perceive unfairness and disadvantage. The term liberal does contain a negative connotation nowadays because of this. This is why the term Progressive is preferred by people like Hilary Clinton and was also the preferred label of Democrats like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. The term Progressive implies forward motion and progress but it is anything but either. Progressiveness often tends to be regressive as rights and liberties of the people are stripped and trampled on. Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Hitler all considered themselves Liberals, Socialists, and/or Progressives. In this context they are synonymous. Still think it's a badge of honor?
Way to misrepresent the situation . . . . [big load of horse crap after that]
The people associated with a word or symbol tend to give it a bad connotation.
From the West Wing, admittedly. Still.
Why is 'liberal' a bad word? - YouTube
That and the constant redefining of the word. Scoundrals, theives, racists, and general crooks use that word to cover their tracks.
The liberals that link speaks of would be astonished that they are being lumped with modern liberals.
The "liberal" Lincoln would be judged an extreme social conservative by todays standards.
The "liberals" that brought the vote to blacks would also be astonished that they are being lumped with modern liberals. They would also be amazed that the Democrats are taking credit for all the achievements.
The US has totally change the word Liberal so much.
The clip from The West Wing becomes very much like this quote, I printed a copy of it and hung it on my wall:
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a forty-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
--Joe Conason
I also remember keeping a newspaper article from the 90s, when Pat Schroeder retired from the House of Representatives, where she said she was "proud to be a liberal". Just a few little reassurances I could turn to to remind me that you don't let the opposition define you, you have to do that for yourself.
When I'm with my more arrogant, dyed in the wool Liberal hating conservative friends I usually bring up my favorite line:
Just remember -- it was the conservative traditionalists that nailed Christ to his cross!
you will change your mind when you have money.
Interestingly enough, I've heard statistics show that more millionaires vote Democrat than Republican, but I've always taken that to mean that the average person isn't as much of a greedy douche as some would have us believe.An acknowledgement that the Republican Party blatantly caters to the wealthy (individuals and corporations)?
While it was usually referred to as Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy was actually Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue. The third part was supposed to be "If you somehow find out about someone's sexual orientation, you must ignore the fact that you learned about it. Don't talk about to anyone, and don't try to get them removed from the military." That part got largely ignored. How different would it have been treated if anyone that tried to tell on someone else for being gay got kicked out for tattling?Way to misrepresent the situation. Don't ask don't tell was instituted by Clinton. The only reason there was ever a movement to repeal it is because of the whiners who felt the need to outwardly express their homosexuality while serving in the military. It was instituted to allow gays to serve in the military by making their orientation no one's business but their own and banned the "are you a homosexual?" question from military entrance exams which was standard practice until 1993. But no!! The militant gays had to have their cake and eat it too and made it an issue of being forced back into the closet, when that was NEVER the intent. Granted things have gotten better the past 20 years and being out isn't as controversial as it once was. Believe me, I'm grateful for that; but if gays really want to be treated fairly and not fuck up all the progress that's been made we need to collectively be a little more aware of that progress and stop being so paranoid about dubious intentions that may not exist.
It's less begging for that shit storm and more asking our soldiers to be considerate human beings. If the homophobic soldiers are incapable of getting along with their coworkers in a professional manner, they need to find another job. Period. It's really no different than any other job in that regard, but the military is held to an even higher standard. If they're unable to even maintain a cool professional relationship with the people there to keep them alive and take them home, I do NOT want them armed and representing my country overseas until they learn to grow a thicker skin and deal with it.We will never have a population that's 100% accepting of homosexuality, period. Forcing heterosexual men and women to knowingly serve alongside gay individuals and shut up about it is begging for a shit storm of controversy. Not everyone has to agree with our sexuality and forcing them to is not only wrong it's feeble minded. Just as you have a God given right to your opinions, so do straight people. But we can individually do our part to change the hearts and minds of others if we're not too forceful or militant about it.
First off, the military doesn't look kindly on unwanted sexual advances regardless of gender. Openly homosexual doesn't mean hitting on every soldier with a penis. Discretion and professionalism is expected of all soldiers in such endeavors, and gay soldiers are no different. If the rules are being enforced differently for them, than that is an issue with the people enforcing the rules; a separate matter that needs to be dealt with on its own.Also, ending don't ask don't tell technically didn't end a ban on gays serving outwardly in the military. Gay men and women can still be discharged for sexual misconduct if they are accused of making unwanted advanced toward fellow military members of the same sex. Of course there should be proof if that occurs but this didn't make serving in the military as easy as you guys think it did and this is just the beginning of unknown consequences. There are some gay people who will never come out because they are fully aware of the unintended ramifications for making their orientation known to their colleagues. Speaking from experience, it is at times easier to keep it to yourself than to make your colleagues unnecessarily uncomfortable around you. All the sensitivity training in the world will never overcome that. Once the cat's out of the bag you can't get it back in and you cannot predict or control the feelings of others and to try is an exercise in futility. There's a reason why Pandora's box needs to stay closed. This is a clear case of progressive policy having a regressive effect.
While it was usually referred to as Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy was actually Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue. . .