Can someone tell me what the "liberal agenda" is?

That's a progressive agenda, BTW.

On it's face they mean well. In execution it pretty much turns into whatever they want will be forced on you through the gov't. It's a very elitist and narcissistic ideology no matter how much they try to convince you they're looking out for the little guy.

The believe in a glass ceiling, held up by government programs, to keep voters on the edge of poverty and voting for more in a block for liberal politicians...

Of course, there are "extremes" on each 'side'. So, I will ignore those.

To me, the chief difference is to what degree one wants a homogenized American experience.

The "liberals" (as constituted by the 'left' in the body politic, today) tend to want MORE of a centralized, Federal Gov control / determination of how things must be. It creates a more homogeneous experience. Each group, state, etc is given an edict on how 'things should be'.

The problem is that creates a HUGE bureaucratic monster that is difficult to administer AND virtually eliminates competition of ideas between States. One state is not free to try a different approach to problem solving and letting citizens vote by moving. Understanding that it creates difficulty on SOME citizens for whom "moving" is more difficult.


IMO, the "left" sees that there are needs for safeguards to keep some 'elites' from taking advantage of others by misbehavior and fraud, etc. The Gov is needed to more even the playing field and to make sure that some business owner or local bigwig isn't as easily able to harm or steal from the citizenry.

My belief is it simply switches the location of the 'elite' that is causing harm from the local to the federal level. And, the inefficiencies cause more harm than good.


For all the trolling as assholerry that Rex, et al, post on here....there would be very little difference in the way the nation exists were his views to be in "control".

I think the biggest decline would be in the lack of competition between states (noted above). But,that is simply opinion and the entire basis of of form of government. And, in fact, the opposing "side" point of view provides the very competition of ideas that I think is so healthy. Thus, aside from the extremes, I think it is a net good that we have BOTH views being expressed and competing.

I am conservative (Libertarian)..but, do not see liberalism as an enemy.

ETA: I think dishonest, disingenuous "side supporting" is the enemy. BOTH 'sides' have plenty of that. We would be better off with fewer hacks that simply let "my side" get away with it based upon previous "other side" behavior.

The liberal agenda is driven by the value system of Egalitarianism. Life is not fair and only the fiat power of centralized govt can make it fair. This is why liberal rhetoric has a lot of class warfare, social justice, equality, etc.

The gay agenda can be seen in 3 goals... legality, tolerance, normal.
The legality of being gay was achieved a long time ago. Tolerance has been achieved during our lifetime. The next goal is for homosexuality to be viewed by the public as perfectly normal. That's going to be difficult because of biology.

Bring about Socialism as a vehicle for Communism.

/thread

quote:

---

Can someone tell me what the "liberal agenda" is?

---

The destruction of America.

The liberal agenda is control of the American voting public.

The motto: You are to stupid to run your own life so we must run it for you.

" To free each citizen from job-lock so they can write more poetry!"