SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (91783)12/22/2004 9:11:26 AM
From: Mary Cluney  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793759
 
They wanted to change things but in many ways the way they wanted to change things was more like what conservatives currently support. Although to be sure there would likely be many disagreements with modern day conservatives, and even a number of areas where they would be closer to the liberals.


For the most part, the current conservative movement has been taken over by intolerant people who want to maintain the status quo (of maybe 100 years ago) with respect to their views on race, gender, and religion. Conservative purists in terms of philosophy and economic outlook are probably no more than 2 to 5% of those that identify themselves as being on the right in the political spectrum.

Similarly, the liberal movement was hijacked in the 60's by extreme elements.

On a day to day basis, the true Conservative and Liberal are probably much closer in view than they would be with the extreme elements.

If the extremists on the liberal side had their way, civil society would break down. There would be a lot of chaos.

If the extremists on the conservative side had their way, all those that do not toe the line will of course have to be killed.

The bottom line however is that Bill Clinton and George W Bush are pretty good proxies for the two opposing views. As much as I disliked Bill Clinton for his personal excesses, I think life is much better under a Bill Clinton administration.