"Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the future."
The future is what we can change. The past is done and cannot be changed. It's better to focus on the future both in politics and life.
I want to know why you would disagree with this...
I'm not sure at all
Some people don't want the middle of the road answers.
You're right, and it's unfortunate
But it doesn't say middle-of-the-road, it says right. It just says we shouldn't view it as "this party's" or "that party's", and just strive for what is right.
Many likely take that as a middle of the road between democrats and republicans
It's kind of sad, really.
Sunshine, OK agree, I will say some don't want to be on the road at all. They'd rather go over the cliff than meet anyone on the road.
How quickly gene
Ok, so my phone has gone mad. How quickly generations change...
I thought this quote was appropriate given the recent situation in Washington
Quote by John F. Kennedy
Yes I agree with Kennedy on this and his description for,why he was proud to be a liberal
And why was he proud to be liberal?
That would be nice if it was an accurate description of liberalism. However, the facts are government interference is not the only way to benefit the lives of the people and it generally has the opposite reaction.
I would highly beg to differ on whether or not that's an accurate description of liberalism, I personally feel it is. But the chances f us agreeing are about the chances of Zeus eating my dog, so...
Perhaps it is the correct definition but would you agree that few live up to it?
Unfortunately few do live up to all the points in his quote
I will claim the definition of liberal has changed over time in this country. JFK was not liberal in the way I consider myself liberal, but he was for sure not like those we see as the liberals today either.
skinner, what does "government interference" have to do with liberalism?
"...someone who cares about...their civil rights, and their civil liberties..."
I wish that could be said for liberals in government.
Liberalism is the belief that government can pave the way for Americans and that a larger government can provide for them. I consider it meddling and counterproductive.
Skinner. That may be how those we call liberals today act, but that's not the original definition of liberalism.
No. Liberalism is a philosophy of mind that can be applied to politics, or to business, or to social issues, or to economics, or to personal behavior, etc. It implies nothing specific regarding the scope or scale or reach of government.
@Tom I know classical liberalism was very different
@arct: well in politics by the modern definition it espouses government
Modern Liberals (not liberalism) tend to support government intervention/regulation in varying situations when LACK of such in those situations permits and proliferates inequality, injustice, or harm to humanity and home. There's not a general, base argument that calls for large government.
Funny enough, those who posit themselves as opposite of modern Liberals tend to vociferously oppose gov't intervention/regulation in those situations, thereby allowing and supporting the proliferation of inequality, etc., claiming that their opposition is to "big gov't" while also loudly demanding -
- that gov't intervene in private lives to prevent individuals from doing things that they find unpleasant or disturbing to their sacredness (e.g. LGBT issues, drug use, artistic expression, etc.) So, really, neither of the two popular ends of the spectrum want small gov't, but one end claims to...
But none of this is a fixed principle of liberalism, a philosophy of mind that advocates remaining open to ideas and information, as opposed to refuting new input for no reason besides stubbornness. Liberalism is the philosophical trend that created the US.