Posted on 04/12/2008 6:35:04 AM PDT by OESY
...Despite such illiberal pandering, both Clinton and Obama know that a traditional liberal position would be to defend free trade that lowers prices and increases choices for poorer American consumers- while helping foreign economies catch up with the United States.
Free trade isn't the only example in which liberal Democrats advocate positions that sound parochial and blinkered. Let's take an environmental issue. It may seem environmentally correct for liberals to oppose oil drilling in a small part of Alaska. But how is this prohibition in any way liberal?
Unless Americans are willing to accept a drastic reduction in their standard of living or can discover novel methods of conserving or creating energy, in the short-term transportation fuel will have to come from somewhere....
Homegrown, clean-burning biofuels sound great as a partial replacement for polluting foreign petroleum. But at present, to supply grain-based ethanol, we are diverting a large percentage of US farm acreage away from food production. The result- apart from the net energy loss needed to grow and refine ethanol- is that the price of basic food staples is soaring....
"No blood for oil" and "American imperialism" may be catchy slogans, but no serious observer believes that the United States is stealing Iraq's oil or trying to colonize the country. The Iraqis themselves are selling oil on their own terms, and they are no longer so eager for Americans to pack up and leave their fragile democracy before it's stabilized.
Finally, what is the liberal position on race?...
In short, with all this demagoguing, backtracking and firing of aides, we don't always know exactly what the Democratic position is on trade, energy, Iraq or race - only that it is seems to be far from what we once thought was liberal.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
author@victorhanson.com
“Unless Americans are willing to accept a drastic reduction in their standard of living. . .”
I propose identifying states/regions that consistently elect liberal Democrats to Congress, and then completely shutting off all utitlities (electricity, water, natural gas), as well as stopping all shipments of gasoline, oil, etc., into these areas. This will let them experience first-hand what they are promoting, either directly or indirectly, through their electoral choices (not to mention a reduction in their carbon footprints).
With these people, someone else is expected to make the sacrifice. Bring the consequences home and see how they like it.
“nyp: democrats vs liberalism.”
they have it all wrong. it should read:
“blackshirts vs brownshirts.”
(and the more apropos version: “spoiled, intellectualizing, arrogant, presumptuous,stalin-loving punks vs. internationalist, revolutionary, thieving, murdering scu&bags.)
IMHO
High fuel prices hurt the poor the most. These are the very poor the Liberals claim to be protecting form the big oil companies.
There are many Liberal positions that are counter to their claims.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.