What does being a "Liberal" mean? (US)

[Griff]

If someone really is a "consensus" liberal or conservative they are ending up in the same place out of necessity. To claim that one's own position is more centrist is natural and wrong-headed. It means we're pretending the other side is all extremists therefor we don't have to reach consensus with them. It also means we probably don't spend much time listening to the other parties moderates about what their values are.

[lookout123]

Well, I'm a conservative so my values are hate and intolerance. or so I've been told.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by Griff

If someone really is a "consensus" liberal or conservative they are ending up in the same place out of necessity. To claim that one's own position is more centrist is natural and wrong-headed. It means we're pretending the other side is all extremists therefor we don't have to reach consensus with them. It also means we probably don't spend much time listening to the other parties moderates about what their values are.

I disagree

Consensus means commonly held. I base it on public opinion, widely accepted policies and practices, etc.

There is a commonly held position, i.e. consensus, that a woman should have the right to chose, with limited exceptions. An extreme position is to deny those rights under any circumstances. Or, the current Republican candidates' focus on Sharia law as a threat to the US is not based on any evidence that such a threat exists.

A system of progressive taxation is the consensus system because it has been widely accepted as the "fairest" system since the income tax was first introduced 75+ years ago and is widely accepted in every industrial nation in the world. A flat tax system is extreme.

But, I dont characterize the two extremes in the same manner. The first is extremely intolerant of the rights of others. The second is just an extreme departure from current policies and practices.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Well, I'm a conservative so my values are hate and intolerance. or so I've been told.

If you dont want your church to conduct gay marriages, that is between you and your church and not intolerant. If you want the government to prohibit the right of a gay couple to marry or have the same rights as married couples, that is imposing your religious values on the broader society; values that dont have consensus support, and IMO, intolerant.

The same does not apply to supporting a flat tax. Different issues and different meaning of extreme.

added:

I think the intolerance shows up in the social issues where, more often than not, they are defined by religious doctrine. But then again, I think most organized religions are intolerant to some degree.

Fiscal issues (tax policy, regulatory policy, etc) are defined more by political ideology rather than religious doctrine.

[Griff]

We happen to agree on these issues as framed, but a generation of voters has to die off before complete gay rights are the consensus. You appear to be basing your belief of what constitutes consensus on agreement with yourself and like-minded people. I forget whose sock puppet I'm addressing, (if you are a one label poster I apologize) but I'm going to guess that you are middle-aged urbanite, since your "consensus" ideas reflect that background. Where I live, the consensus positions are gun rights, low tax rates, and individual responsibility. If I only talked to locals I'd never suspect that 1/2 the country doesn't buy it.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by Griff

We happen to agree on these issues as framed, but a generation of voters has to die off before complete gay rights are the consensus. You appear to be basing your belief of what constitutes consensus on agreement with yourself and like-minded people. I forget whose sock puppet I'm addressing, (if you are a one label poster I apologize) but I'm going to guess that you are middle-aged urbanite, since your "consensus" ideas reflect that background. Where I live, the consensus positions are gun rights, low tax rates, and individual responsibility. If I only talked to locals I'd never suspect that 1/2 the country doesn't buy it.

No, I am not basing consensus on myself and like-minded people. I thought I was clear that I am basing it on broad national public opinion (not any one selected community) and/or widely held and long-term policies and practices.

I dont see a need to address the sock pocket comment.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

I dont see a need to address the sock pocket comment.

I must be crankier today than I thought.

What percentage would you put on consensus? I'd say it has to be broad enough to encompass about 68% of the population so you can drop the nutters off each end of the bell curve.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by Griff

I must be crankier today than I thought.

What percentage would you put on consensus? I'd say it has to be broad enough to encompass about 68% of the population so you can drop the nutters off each end of the bell curve.

I would put the percentage as somewhere between one half and two thirds.

But, I'll use your nutters on the end of the bell curve as an example.

You posted earlier that Frank Gafney is an extremist and I agree. But I would suggest that when the conservative Republican presidential candidates espouse his position that Sharia law threatens the American lifestyle because they believe such a position will help raise their credibility with conservative voters, then the nutter end of the bell curve on the conservative side is wider than just the most extreme nutters.

On the issues of abortion and gay marriage, I would never suggest that opposing those issues is extremist, given that nearly half the country probably hold that view. Counseling young women against abortions is not extreme unless it crosses over to intimidation and spreading misinformation. And I said earlier that if one does not want to have his church sanction gay marriage, I dont think that is extreme or intolerant.

The extremism is the idea of legislating that moral position through a Constitutional amendment denying rights to a segment of society. This has significantly less support, yet is the official platform of the Republican party. Again, that extreme end of the bell curve on the conservative side is wider than just the nutters.

On the issue of lower taxes that you raised, particularly for the middle class, who doesnt support that?

But when all of the Republican candidates support a flat tax or flatter tax (like lookout's), they are not support lower taxes. They are support equalizing the tax rates (or coming closer) among all taxpayers in the form of tax simplification. As I pointed out in another thread, the flatter tax would raise taxes on those current paying no tax by 10% (lookout's proposal) and raise taxes on the middle class (who currently benefit from lots of deductions) by 15%. The only taxpayers not paying significantly more under his proposal are the wealthy.

IMO a tax policy that is so drastically altered, not to lower taxes, but to make the working poor and middle class pay a higher percentage or a "fairer" share, not to mention the adverse affect it would have on the economy (middle class paying 15% more are not likely to have much more disposal income to spend), that is extreme.

[Griff]

You are right on the structure of taxes. The GOP candidates are being deceptive about the level of taxation people would face and the nature of the cuts in services they'd need to balance a budget. I don't want to see the top tax rate go much over 1/3 because I think that does have the effect of suppressing economic activity. That said, we have to end all those deductions out there so people do pay their share. We do face what is essentially a national debt emergency so a temporary higher rate may be necessary.

[Fair&Balanced]

I think tax simplification is a longer term issue than the immediate need to address the debt.

In terms of temporary higher rates, keep in mind that the 01 and 03 tax cuts were intended to be temporary and to have expired last year. They did little to stimulate the economy and in fact, the cuts to the top bracket were probably the single most significant factor, in terms of lost revenue, in contributing to the debt over the last 5-8 years. A return to the Clinton marginal rate of 39% (as opposed to the current 36%) still keeps the effective rate below your 33% ceiling and the wealthiest taxpayers would still be paying at or near their lowest taxes in 50 years.

In terms of "paying a fair share," that depends on how we define fair. IMO, tax rate equalization is not fair and places a far greater tax burden on those with far less disposal income.

I find the term "zero liability voter" thats been tossed around here (not by you) to be offensive. Anyone who works hard, pays other taxes (payroll, sales, etc) is contributing to the best of their financial ability.

[Griff]

I got thinking about this thread when I found out the only serious opposition to the Patriot Act continuance was Rand Paul. Right or wrong there should have been some serious public discourse on this one. Did Obama put out a justification statement? I'm assuming the GOP candidate will support this, but for now it looks like a strike against the "liberal".

[Fair&Balanced]

Rand Paul wasnt the only one to vote against this Patriot Act extension.

The vote was 72-23 in the Senate, with Rand being the only Republican to vote NO. The others were all liberal democrats.

And, IMO, having voted for it in the Senate and now signing the latest extension. this is another reason that I would suggest the Obama is not as liberal as some suggest. There was no justification statement, just a one sentence press statement.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Obama is not as liberal as some suggest.

Very much yes. He has let down the liberal wing of the party over and over. He has made definitely positive liberal/progressive strides, but he has also taken downright conservative stances on many issues, especially on national security and civil liberties.

[Undertoad]

IOW he has represented the majority of the people of the nation, and well done he will be reëlected.

[Ibby]

I agree. I think he's done a great job as president - but it could have been better, from my point of view. President Obama is actually MORE, not LESS, moderate than Candidate Obama.