Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 67

Thread: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senator
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    1,160

    Default Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    BBC

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Quote Originally Posted by BBC
    Is there a more elastic word in the English language than the word liberal?

    Is there a more abused, innocent, in-need-of-protection-from-bullies-word than the word liberal?

    On either side of the Atlantic - for that matter, wherever English is spoken - liberal means whatever the speaker says it means, although that is often not what the hearer thinks it means. Confusion reigns.

    In America, neo-conservatives call themselves neo-liberals when it comes to economic theory. They advocate liberal interventionism in foreign policy.

    Liberals in Britain find the phrase liberal intervention to be an oxymoron and cringe at the very idea of intervening in another country's affairs, no matter how vicious the regime.

    A couple of years ago, if you told an American that the Liberal Party was in power in Australia, the last thing he would have thought was that Liberal leader John Howard was a conservative slightly to the right of Ronald Reagan.

    It must befuddle the bejesus out of fans of Rush Limbaugh - dean of America's influential right-wing talk radio - to think that Britain's Conservative Party, the party of Margaret Thatcher, is in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.


    Heads spinning


    First of all, for Rush that would be a redundant name. For them Liberal = Democrat.

    But beyond that, Liberal = Socialist, and it is not possible to contemplate a coalition between Thatcher's party and socialists.

    And if you remind them that their other true British hero, Winston Churchill, started out a Conservative MP and then became a Liberal MP before returning to the Conservative fold, it absolutely makes their head spin.

    The reason for Churchill's change of allegiance was trade policy. He was a free trader, but his Conservative colleagues believed in protective tariffs, so he crossed over to the Liberal benches in the House of Commons.

    That happened around a century ago, and if you go back another century you get to the origins of the liberal confusion.

    According to most scholars, the word liberalism was first used in 1815 in English.

    It comes from the Latin word liber, meaning free. That part is easy to understand.

    Of course, what it means to be free is hard to pin down, and the methods for insuring that governments allow their citizens to be free is equally muddy.


    'Liberal' revolts


    In its early days, liberal was a word used by that new phenomenon, the capitalist, businessman, or entrepreneur.

    These businessmen wanted to be free to conduct trade across borders without paying tariffs - taxes that often went to supporting the feudal aristocrats who still ruled in much of the continent.

    Democracy, rather than inherited privilege, was a liberal cause.

    US divisions over slavery was the start of the confusion

    Europe in the mid-19th Century was divided up into kingdoms and duchies. Uniting the people of a nation against this ancient order - nationalism - became a liberal cause.

    Many people were second-class citizens based on ancient religious antagonisms. Equality for all citizens became a liberal cause.

    How to achieve liberal goals? In 1848, revolutions swept across Europe.

    Their goals were by and large liberal. People wanted clear national borders and they wanted to be able to trade freely across them.

    These revolutions were bloody at first, and so for some, liberal became closely linked with radical.

    The revolutions ended in failure, but within two decades most of the liberal principles that had been fought for had become common.

    Modern Germany and Italy had been created.

    Strong national movements in smaller countries were thriving.

    But most of all, by the middle of the 19th Century, liberalism meant free trade.

    Certainly, that is what it meant for Britain's Liberal Party which tore itself out of the Conservative (Tory) Party shortly after the events of 1848.


    Not subtle


    Over on the other side of the Atlantic, the word was not in use quite yet, but a massive wave of immigrants from Europe, fleeing the economic conditions that liberalism was not strong enough to fix, arrived in America.

    They supported liberal ideas on personal freedom and infused them into America.
    A new party, the Republican Party, was founded in 1854 and drew immediate support from these immigrants.

    The Republicans were against the slavery that underpinned the economy of the American South.
    Here is the source of modern confusion.

    The South was against tariffs - a liberal position - but it was willing to fight to the death over the right to maintain slavery, as illiberal a position as it is possible to imagine.

    Anyway, from that moment to the present, the word has been bathed in controversy.

    Nationalism is considered illiberal now. Liberals in America question free trade because it costs American workers their jobs.

    Maybe the word liberal can no longer stand on its own. Perhaps it is a weakness of the English language. Our language is wonderful for all manner of expression but on this it lacks subtlety.


    Progressive conservative?


    German might be more useful here. We could run several nouns together to form a single word that conveys our specific meaning: socialliberal or freetradeliberal might add clarity.

    Even better might be socialliberalsolongasitadvancesthe-interestsofmyethnicgroup or freetradeliberalsolongasitmakesme-richandifnotthenI'mprotectionist.

    I love the German language.

    Anyway, the transatlantic confusion is not going away any time soon.

    British Prime Minister David Cameron is, by the current American usage of the word, a liberal.

    He accepts the basic science surrounding climate change theories and is an advocate of gay rights. He even calls himself a progressive.

    The word liberal has been so debased in America by right-wing demagogues that liberals have for at least two decades preferred to call themselves progressives.



    It really is confusing - although perhaps the real transatlantic confusion is not over the meaning of the word liberal but over the meaning of the word conservative.


    Most revealing...

    I think its time to tell the Republicans they're using the wrong word.

    As far as I am concerned, this article has taught me that Liberal=Libertarian (link to liberty which one would assume would lead to the same meaning)
    Last edited by JJDXB; July 24, 2010 at 09:41 PM. Reason: spoiler

  2. #2
    Ayleid's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    695

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by JJDXB View Post

    Really good article, let's hope we get a bit of a debate going along the lines of what people associate 'Liberalism' with and how they define Liberals. Nicely done, +Rep!

  3. #3
    Big War Bird's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    12,340

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Flipping through my dictionary right now - oh my god you wouldn't beleive how many words have multiple defintions. How will I ever know what defintion someone means!!!!

    Oh yeah - from mushrooms.
    Last edited by Big War Bird; July 20, 2010 at 09:30 AM.
    As a teenager, I was taken to various houses and flats above takeaways in the north of England, to be beaten, tortured and raped over 100 times. I was called a “white slag” and “white ****” as they beat me.

    -Ella Hill

  4. #4
    .......................
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    33,982

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Americans call trousers... pants, and they call handegg... football, and they call defence... offence. This debate will take some time.
    Last edited by Каие; July 22, 2010 at 07:13 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Its got a lot to do with boring as hell political history. What it boils down to is that Americans are being confusing and awkward again.
    Quote Originally Posted by A.J.P. Taylor
    Peaceful agreement and government by consent are possible only on the basis of ideas common to all parties; and these ideas must spring from habit and from history. Once reason is introduced, every man, every class, every nation becomes a law unto itself; and the only right which reason understands is the right of the stronger. Reason formulates universal principles and is therefore intolerant: there can be only one rational society, one rational nation, ultimately one rational man. Decisions between rival reasons can be made only by force.





    Quote Originally Posted by H.L Spieghel
    Is het niet hogelijk te verwonderen, en een recht beklaaglijke zaak, Heren, dat alhoewel onze algemene Dietse taal een onvermengde, sierlijke en verstandelijke spraak is, die zich ook zo wijd als enige talen des werelds verspreidt, en die in haar bevang veel rijken, vorstendommen en landen bevat, welke dagelijks zeer veel kloeke en hooggeleerde verstanden uitleveren, dat ze nochtans zo zwakkelijk opgeholpen en zo weinig met geleerdheid verrijkt en versiert wordt, tot een jammerlijk hinder en nadeel des volks?
    Quote Originally Posted by Miel Cools
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen,
    Oud ben maar nog niet verrot.
    Zoals oude bomen zingen,
    Voor Jan Lul of voor hun god.
    Ook een oude boom wil reizen,
    Bij een bries of bij een storm.
    Zelfs al zit zijn kruin vol luizen,
    Zelfs al zit zijn voet vol worm.
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen.

    Cò am Fear am measg ant-sluaigh,
    A mhaireas buan gu bràth?
    Chan eil sinn uileadh ach air chuart,
    Mar dhìthein buaile fàs,
    Bheir siantannan na bliadhna sìos,
    'S nach tog a' ghrian an àird.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jörg Friedrich
    When do I stop being a justified warrior? When I've killed a million bad civilians? When I've killed three million bad civilians? According to a warsimulation by the Pentagon in 1953 the entire area of Russia would've been reduced to ruins with 60 million casualties. All bad Russians. 60 million bad guys. By how many million ''bad'' casualties do I stop being a knight of justice? Isn't that the question those knights must ask themselves? If there's no-one left, and I remain as the only just one,

    Then I'm God.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis Napoleon III, Des Idees Napoleoniennes
    Governments have been established to aid society to overcome the obstacles which impede its march. Their forms have been varied according to the problems they have been called to cure, and according to character of the people they have ruled over. Their task never has been, and never will be easy, because the two contrary elements, of which our existence and the nature of society is composed, demand the employment of different means. In view of our divine essence, we need only liberty and work; in view of our mortal nature, we need for our direction a guide and a support. A government is not then, as a distinguished economist has said, a necessary ulcer; it is rather the beneficent motive power of all social organisation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfgang Held
    I walked into those baracks [of Buchenwald concentrationcamp], in which there were people on the three-layered bunkbeds. But only their eyes were alive. Emaciated, skinny figures, nothing more but skin and bones. One thinks that they are dead, because they did not move. Only the eyes. I started to cry. And then one of the prisoners came, stood by me for a while, put a hand on my shoulder and said to me, something that I will never forget: ''Tränen sind denn nicht genug, mein Junge,
    Tränen sind denn nicht genug.''

    Jajem ssoref is m'n korew
    E goochem mit e wenk, e nar mit e shtomp
    Wer niks is, hot kawsones

  6. #6
    .......................
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    33,982

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Don't forget the Australians.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Яome View Post
    Don't forget the Australians.
    Everything influenced and founded by the English, really. Driving on the left side of the road; using absurd financial terms like guineas and shillings for a very long term and silly terms of measurement like feet and inch. WHY CANT YOU JUST BE NORMAL LIKE ALL OF US.
    Quote Originally Posted by A.J.P. Taylor
    Peaceful agreement and government by consent are possible only on the basis of ideas common to all parties; and these ideas must spring from habit and from history. Once reason is introduced, every man, every class, every nation becomes a law unto itself; and the only right which reason understands is the right of the stronger. Reason formulates universal principles and is therefore intolerant: there can be only one rational society, one rational nation, ultimately one rational man. Decisions between rival reasons can be made only by force.





    Quote Originally Posted by H.L Spieghel
    Is het niet hogelijk te verwonderen, en een recht beklaaglijke zaak, Heren, dat alhoewel onze algemene Dietse taal een onvermengde, sierlijke en verstandelijke spraak is, die zich ook zo wijd als enige talen des werelds verspreidt, en die in haar bevang veel rijken, vorstendommen en landen bevat, welke dagelijks zeer veel kloeke en hooggeleerde verstanden uitleveren, dat ze nochtans zo zwakkelijk opgeholpen en zo weinig met geleerdheid verrijkt en versiert wordt, tot een jammerlijk hinder en nadeel des volks?
    Quote Originally Posted by Miel Cools
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen,
    Oud ben maar nog niet verrot.
    Zoals oude bomen zingen,
    Voor Jan Lul of voor hun god.
    Ook een oude boom wil reizen,
    Bij een bries of bij een storm.
    Zelfs al zit zijn kruin vol luizen,
    Zelfs al zit zijn voet vol worm.
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen.

    Cò am Fear am measg ant-sluaigh,
    A mhaireas buan gu bràth?
    Chan eil sinn uileadh ach air chuart,
    Mar dhìthein buaile fàs,
    Bheir siantannan na bliadhna sìos,
    'S nach tog a' ghrian an àird.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jörg Friedrich
    When do I stop being a justified warrior? When I've killed a million bad civilians? When I've killed three million bad civilians? According to a warsimulation by the Pentagon in 1953 the entire area of Russia would've been reduced to ruins with 60 million casualties. All bad Russians. 60 million bad guys. By how many million ''bad'' casualties do I stop being a knight of justice? Isn't that the question those knights must ask themselves? If there's no-one left, and I remain as the only just one,

    Then I'm God.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis Napoleon III, Des Idees Napoleoniennes
    Governments have been established to aid society to overcome the obstacles which impede its march. Their forms have been varied according to the problems they have been called to cure, and according to character of the people they have ruled over. Their task never has been, and never will be easy, because the two contrary elements, of which our existence and the nature of society is composed, demand the employment of different means. In view of our divine essence, we need only liberty and work; in view of our mortal nature, we need for our direction a guide and a support. A government is not then, as a distinguished economist has said, a necessary ulcer; it is rather the beneficent motive power of all social organisation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfgang Held
    I walked into those baracks [of Buchenwald concentrationcamp], in which there were people on the three-layered bunkbeds. But only their eyes were alive. Emaciated, skinny figures, nothing more but skin and bones. One thinks that they are dead, because they did not move. Only the eyes. I started to cry. And then one of the prisoners came, stood by me for a while, put a hand on my shoulder and said to me, something that I will never forget: ''Tränen sind denn nicht genug, mein Junge,
    Tränen sind denn nicht genug.''

    Jajem ssoref is m'n korew
    E goochem mit e wenk, e nar mit e shtomp
    Wer niks is, hot kawsones

  8. #8
    Lord Mandelson's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In the hearts and minds of the British public.
    Posts
    649

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Croccer View Post
    WHY CANT YOU JUST BE NORMAL LIKE ALL OF US.
    It's not our fault we're so epic. And Holland is a normal country?

    News to me.

  9. #9
    .......................
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    33,982

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Croccer View Post
    Everything influenced and founded by the English, really.
    You mean like the Netherlands?

  10. #10
    Lord Mandelson's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In the hearts and minds of the British public.
    Posts
    649

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Яome View Post
    You mean like the Netherlands?
    Actually that would rather back his theory up.

  11. #11
    Claudius Gothicus's Avatar Petit Burgués
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    8,544

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    American's definition of a Liberal is mostly a Social-Democrat(ehhm sorry a dirty commie?)

    Rest of the World's definition of Liberal is someone with fairly progressive social views and a mostly free-trade with regulations economy.

    Under the Patronage of
    Maximinus Thrax

  12. #12

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Яome View Post
    You mean like the Netherlands?
    Other way around bud. You took our financial system, royal lineage and loanwords first.
    Quote Originally Posted by A.J.P. Taylor
    Peaceful agreement and government by consent are possible only on the basis of ideas common to all parties; and these ideas must spring from habit and from history. Once reason is introduced, every man, every class, every nation becomes a law unto itself; and the only right which reason understands is the right of the stronger. Reason formulates universal principles and is therefore intolerant: there can be only one rational society, one rational nation, ultimately one rational man. Decisions between rival reasons can be made only by force.





    Quote Originally Posted by H.L Spieghel
    Is het niet hogelijk te verwonderen, en een recht beklaaglijke zaak, Heren, dat alhoewel onze algemene Dietse taal een onvermengde, sierlijke en verstandelijke spraak is, die zich ook zo wijd als enige talen des werelds verspreidt, en die in haar bevang veel rijken, vorstendommen en landen bevat, welke dagelijks zeer veel kloeke en hooggeleerde verstanden uitleveren, dat ze nochtans zo zwakkelijk opgeholpen en zo weinig met geleerdheid verrijkt en versiert wordt, tot een jammerlijk hinder en nadeel des volks?
    Quote Originally Posted by Miel Cools
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen,
    Oud ben maar nog niet verrot.
    Zoals oude bomen zingen,
    Voor Jan Lul of voor hun god.
    Ook een oude boom wil reizen,
    Bij een bries of bij een storm.
    Zelfs al zit zijn kruin vol luizen,
    Zelfs al zit zijn voet vol worm.
    Als ik oud ben wil ik zingen.

    Cò am Fear am measg ant-sluaigh,
    A mhaireas buan gu bràth?
    Chan eil sinn uileadh ach air chuart,
    Mar dhìthein buaile fàs,
    Bheir siantannan na bliadhna sìos,
    'S nach tog a' ghrian an àird.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jörg Friedrich
    When do I stop being a justified warrior? When I've killed a million bad civilians? When I've killed three million bad civilians? According to a warsimulation by the Pentagon in 1953 the entire area of Russia would've been reduced to ruins with 60 million casualties. All bad Russians. 60 million bad guys. By how many million ''bad'' casualties do I stop being a knight of justice? Isn't that the question those knights must ask themselves? If there's no-one left, and I remain as the only just one,

    Then I'm God.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis Napoleon III, Des Idees Napoleoniennes
    Governments have been established to aid society to overcome the obstacles which impede its march. Their forms have been varied according to the problems they have been called to cure, and according to character of the people they have ruled over. Their task never has been, and never will be easy, because the two contrary elements, of which our existence and the nature of society is composed, demand the employment of different means. In view of our divine essence, we need only liberty and work; in view of our mortal nature, we need for our direction a guide and a support. A government is not then, as a distinguished economist has said, a necessary ulcer; it is rather the beneficent motive power of all social organisation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfgang Held
    I walked into those baracks [of Buchenwald concentrationcamp], in which there were people on the three-layered bunkbeds. But only their eyes were alive. Emaciated, skinny figures, nothing more but skin and bones. One thinks that they are dead, because they did not move. Only the eyes. I started to cry. And then one of the prisoners came, stood by me for a while, put a hand on my shoulder and said to me, something that I will never forget: ''Tränen sind denn nicht genug, mein Junge,
    Tränen sind denn nicht genug.''

    Jajem ssoref is m'n korew
    E goochem mit e wenk, e nar mit e shtomp
    Wer niks is, hot kawsones

  13. #13
    Their Law's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    York
    Posts
    4,249

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Croccer View Post
    Other way around bud. You took our financial system, royal lineage and loanwords first.
    And made them infinitely cooler in the process .
    "You have a decent ear for notes
    but you can't yet appreciate harmony."

  14. #14

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Croccer View Post
    Other way around bud. You took our financial system, royal lineage and loanwords first.
    And your navy to. We took that as well
    Quote Originally Posted by Denny Crane! View Post
    How about we define the rights that allow a government to say that isn't within my freedom.

  15. #15
    Senator
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    1,160

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    To me at least, liberal means to remove as much regulation as to be free (which I assume should come naturally because of the obvious link with the word liberty, so in essence Libertarianism and Liberalism should really be two words for the same), which would make the Right-Wing in the US Liberal, along the lines of the Australian Liberals.

  16. #16
    Lord Mandelson's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In the hearts and minds of the British public.
    Posts
    649

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by JJDXB View Post
    To me at least, liberal means to remove as much regulation as to be free (which I assume should come naturally because of the obvious link with the word liberty, so in essence Libertarianism and Liberalism should really be two words for the same), which would make the Right-Wing in the US Liberal, along the lines of the Australian Liberals.
    Exactly.

  17. #17
    Their Law's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    York
    Posts
    4,249

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by JJDXB View Post
    To me at least, liberal means to remove as much regulation as to be free (which I assume should come naturally because of the obvious link with the word liberty, so in essence Libertarianism and Liberalism should really be two words for the same), which would make the Right-Wing in the US Liberal, along the lines of the Australian Liberals.
    At least when it comes to economics then yes the US right wing is liberal. Not so sure you can ascribe the same to the social policies though.
    "You have a decent ear for notes
    but you can't yet appreciate harmony."

  18. #18
    Vizsla's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    That place where the sun don't shine (England)
    Posts
    1,290

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    The right in the US is a really long way to the right compared to most other countries. So the middle ground over which the left and right have their dividing lines is also way to the right compared to most countries.
    This is because the voters at the extremes always vote the same way so the people with middling opinions decide elections and politicians will say anything to win those votes.
    Most continental European countries are way to the left of the US. The UK is somewhere in between. Scotland and Wales are very left even compared to the rest of Europe (perhaps because they don’t raise their own taxes). England is probably over to the right a fair way but there are no solely English national elections and the ones we have are muddied by all those pesky Scottish and Welsh votes. Best leave the NI well enough alone.
    Ultimately all this talk about what universal Liberalism or Conservatism is is meaningless. There is a natural tendency to want to put people in boxes to avoid having to actually engage the grey matter but this is best avoided.
    The dividing lines are different in every country because the issues are different in every country. More importantly people in different countries just think about the same things differently.
    In the US gun control is an assault on God given rights. In the UK it’s a jolly good thing, don’t you know.
    People decide whether they are a liberal based on whether they want to think about themselves as that kind of person. It’s a brand. It’s a different brand in every country.
    “Cretans, always liars” Epimenides (of Crete)

  19. #19

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Libertarians are the true Liberals in the US. They are liberal in both social and economic issues unlike the Republicans who are mostly only liberal on economic issues and the Democrats who are really only liberal on social issues.

    IMO its the religious right that is really preventing the Republicans from heading closer to the libertarians. Most Republicans that aren't part of the religious right want small government across the board. Now if we could only find a way to get rid of the the religious right. Sadly, it won't happen anytime soon because with out them, the Republicans would never be able to get elected.

  20. #20
    Mr. Scott's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    3,312

    Default Re: Liberal? Are we talking about the same thing? An interesting article on the BBC

    Quote Originally Posted by l3ol3o View Post
    Libertarians are the true Liberals in the US. They are liberal in both social and economic issues unlike the Republicans who are mostly only liberal on economic issues and the Democrats who are really only liberal on social issues.

    IMO its the religious right that is really preventing the Republicans from heading closer to the libertarians. Most Republicans that aren't part of the religious right want small government across the board. Now if we could only find a way to get rid of the the religious right. Sadly, it won't happen anytime soon because with out them, the Republicans would never be able to get elected.
    Tea party!
    “When my information changes, I alter my conclusions.” ― John Maynard Keynes

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •