Where have all the liberals gone?

Primetime Politics ^ | April 10, 2008 | Victor Davis Hanson

[moderatewolverine]

These days, Democrats are not sounding very liberal. Classic liberals, after all, would support free markets, internationalism, and the universal desire for constitutional government, while downplaying racial affinity. But the following examples highlight how far from these ideals today’s liberals are.

Campaigning earlier this year in recession-prone Ohio, both Democratic candidates trashed the North American Free Trade Agreement. Sen. Barack Obama advocated renegotiation of the treaty. And Sen. Hillary Clinton assured voters she had always opposed NAFTA, an agreement that was concluded under her husband’s administration.

But then a funny thing happened. A top economic adviser to Obama, Austan Goolsbee, reportedly made back-channel assurances to Canadian officials that such talk of protectionism was merely campaign rhetoric.

Then an even funnier thing transpired. Clinton’s chief campaign strategist (who has since been “reassigned”), Mark Penn, reportedly advised Colombian officials of how to court votes in Congress to assure passage of a new free-trade agreement — just the opposite of Clinton’s position.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Where have all the liberals gone?

Oh, they're still around, believe me.

You just have to know how to recognize them, is all.

[gusopol3]

better a liberal than a leftist which is what the Democrats have been for decades

[AdaGray]

They will say whatever they have to say. It is not about principles (Liberal or otherwsie), it’s about power.

[Kozak]

They have all retreated behind the cover of the term “Progressive”.

[sickoflibs]

lol

[moderatewolverine]

Don’t they understand that if we progress too far we’ll veer off the course that brought us here?? I look into the future and imagine what kind of country is going to be run by the generation growing up with MTV, Britney Spears, reality TV etc., and I get quite worried.

[MarkL]

Simple... The leadership of what used to be "liberal" groups in the USA have been replaced by idealogical marxists, leninists, and in some cases, even stalinists.

They have NOTHING in common with "classical liberalism." They are authoritarian, and will brook no dissension.

Mark

[vaudine]

Short answer--to Washington.

vaudine

[klgator]

Don’t they understand that if we progress too far we’ll veer off the course that brought us here?? I look into the future and imagine what kind of country is going to be run by the generation growing up with MTV, Britney Spears, reality TV etc., and I get quite worried.

It can't be any worse than what my baby boomer generation unleashed on this country. One healthy sign of the future is the repudiation of the baby boomer generation by the younger members of the Demoncrat Party. They're tired of the heavy-handed tactics and bickering. That's got to be a postitive sign. Perhaps meaningful debate can't be far behind.

[MoreGovLess]

The classic meaning of liberal (still used in publications like The Economist) implies advocacy of markets with minimal government intervention; generally, respect for civil liberties (minimal government interference in individuals affairs). Libertarians are the party closest to that ideal.

It’s funny that the common descriptions we give our parties/movements are opposite of what they actually do.
‘Liberals’ do not liberate or advocate liberty. ‘Conservatives’ do not conserve (they have generally shown little restraint in spending public money)

[Kozak]

They use the term as a smoke screen. They HATE much of what we find the most cherished in our country, but realize that if they are honest about their aims, they will be rejected. So they are the masters at misdirection and deception about just what they DO want.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

It’s funny that the common descriptions we give our parties/movements are opposite of what they actually do.
‘Liberals’ do not liberate or advocate liberty. ‘Conservatives’ do not conserve (they have generally shown little restraint in spending public money)

---

Today’s liberals are in reality marxist/stalinists.

Today’s “conservatives” are objectively stronger on national defense, pay lip service (only) to social issues such as abortion, gun control and immigration, are against an activist judiciary, and have made a faustian bargain with the media, their campaign contributors, and the various entitlement classes to try to “conserve” their own power which is detined to blow up in their faces.

[Andonius_99]

I look into the future and imagine what kind of country is going to be run by the generation growing up with MTV, Britney Spears, reality TV etc., and I get quite worried.

Although it was intended to be a comedy, I almost thought this movie was a documentary when I saw it...

[MrB]

Here’s a little challenge to throw out to any of your “liberal” acquaintances:
***********************
Since the root word of “liberal” is “liberty”, referring to maximal individual freedom,

can you name one issue, not related to consequence free sexual behavior, that “liberals” support?
***********************

If any Freeper can come up with something, I’d also appreciate it. I’m thinking this is a rather bulletproof expository as to what “liberals” are about.

[MrB]

Let’s revise that a bit:

Can you name one issue not related to sexual behavior in which “liberals” support the freedom on the individual to make their own choices?

[roses of sharon]

Forget the pol, your beef is with your fellow Americans who keep them in power.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

I’ve had the same idea for a very long time. The word “liberal” has about the same relationship to liberty as the “Ministry of Truth” in Orwell’s 1984.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

It’s an endless chicken and egg story - but then again there is such a thing as “leadership” which roughly equates to doing the right thing even if it is unpopular.

[popdonnelly]

I’m not concerned about where the liberals have gone, as long as they’ve gone far enough away. They’ve done plenty in the last forty years to ruin this country.