Liberals vs. Conservatives: An Oversimplification

Well said, Tim.

Per my experience,

Liberals act (vote, purchase, argue) from a perspective that supports a view based on contemporary values.

Conservatives act (vote, purchase, argue) from a perspective that supports a view based on traditional values.

I really don't think that either one is more adepth at policy making or social engineering than the other. That doesn't neglect their current standings, since the current system of government or marketing of any wing or echelon is always proven too temporary to be known as a lasting power. (Look at the Democrat Majority from the 1950's to the 1990's.)

Also, liberal/conservative standings are very sensitive to the adjacent trends, i.e. if disney were to all of the sudden support gay marraige, it would put any associated company or related personality in the hot spot if they detracted from the mainstream disney message. Suddenly, Melissa Etheridge wouldn't be welcome only in the homes of Left Wing politicos, but just everywhere, reducing her "contemporary values" stigma to merely commonplace.

Where the values of today come into conflict with the traditional values, which connect a broad scope of the social/cultural landscape, is where the battle for what tommorow's intentions want to be like. Liberals have used for years the message that Conservatives think heartlessly and serve corporate demands, and Conservatives have retorted much in the same manner that Liberals destroy both a moral heritage and make plans that seemingly will harm the public.

Honestly, they seem to do the same thing. The simplest outcome is that each message is it's spent manipulating specifically inclined populaces.

-=T=-

I like this line from The Kinks Uncle Son:
Liberals dream of equal rights,
Conservatives live in a world gone by,
Socialists preach of a promised land,
But old uncle son, was an ordinary man.

I find the point of this song to be that in the end, the average person just wants to live a nice normal life. They want to be able to work hard and provide for their family. Left, right, center, whatever, this should be the ultimate goal.

And, to be clear .. I didn't assume that the statement was Daniel's. Note that I commented on the content of the statement .. not on Daniel. Neither did I say that I agreed with everything that anon said.

So there's no confusion:

"Liberals ... don’t know how to get us there. They ... lack the ability to make difficult decisions that benefit the whole."

I disagree. (Though I don't disagree that some conservatives believe these things -- not the "..." part ... just the stuff I included in my quote.)

I don't disagree with the other half so much. Conservatives have (in recent years) been better at getting an extremist base motivated to vote and then using the resulting power to effect some change.

I find all of this sad because the bulk of Americans are more or less in the middle of the spectrum, but our two party system makes it difficult for a centrist ideology to have political success.

Actually Daniel, if a person is unaware of the previous post, I can see how they would assume that these are your quotes since the poli sci quiz wasn't referenced in this post ..

I think the "Submit Comment" button should be renamed to "Warning, submission may lead one to make an ass of oneself should one have failed to understand the post"

I think anon and Carl should re-read the post.

I wouldn't say the conservatives didn't get anything done... I'd say the stuff they got done probably wasn't considered a positive thing to most sensible individuals.

I wasn't going to comment because the original statement was less an oversimplification than just a silly statement, but I'm going to have to agree more with anon than with the original post.

I see -- so by your description, Bill Clinton sucked at getting things accomplished and GWB is a master of execution?

You're either fundamentally a conservative thinker that is showing prejudice, or you've been influenced by the Corporate Media to believe conservatism is superior -- despite its absolutely dismal track record.

Conservatism as a philosophy has simply failed. It's not that Bush is a bad implementor of conservative ideas, it's that conservatism itself is a bankrupt ideology.

FDR, Kennedy, Clinton -- these people were liberal and got lots done and were extremely effective.

Bush JR, Bush Sr, Kristol, Feith and the other neocons -- absolute failures at addressing the core needs of society. They simply excelled at consolidating money and power into the hands of a small group of people -- not moving us forward as a society and country.