Personal liberties versus socialism in America's future?

[wordcreatorushtwf]

As the year 2010 begins and Congress once again considers enacting laws that some believe endanger the free enterprise system and personal liberties, a collection of essays in Liberty Versus the Tyranny of Socialism are timely. The book asks questions that many American are pondering since the election of Barack Obama.

Read more

[AssHatZombie]

Collectivism is always a means to destroy individuals. Abstraction abuse is rampant in world conquest.

[China Apologist]

Personal liberty cannot come about without socialism.

[DamnYankee]

That's because you fail to understand that with freedom comes responsibility; you want freedom from responsibility.

[Yurt]

Personal liberty cannot come about without socialism.

you have no concept of individual liberty then...socialism is not about individual liberty, it is about collective liberty

[wanderingbear]

That's because you fail to understand that with freedom comes responsibility; you want freedom from responsibility.

Actually freedom by definition is a lack of all responsibilities except for those you chose to uphold.

[SmarterthanYou]

you have no concept of individual liberty then...socialism is not about individual liberty, it is about collective liability

fixed that for you.

[Crashk]

The book asks questions that many American are pondering since the election of Barack Obama.

Read more

George W. Bush began the movement toward Socialism

"According to the banner on the cover of Newsweek,"We Are All Socialists Now." The America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state.
The authors, Jon Meacham and Evan Thomas, believe that the transition actually started under a conservative Republican administration, which nationalized the banking and mortgage industry. George W. Bush began the movement toward Socialism when he and the Democratic controlled Congress used $700 billion dollars to bail out the banking industry.
President Bush signs historic $700 billion plan aimed at stemming credit crisis.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/03/news...lout/index.htm

It really doesn't matter who's in office now does it. The failure of conservative ideology will force more govt. intervention to keep our society alive.

[Damocles]

Actually freedom by definition is a lack of all responsibilities except for those you chose to uphold.

The exercise of freedom is the willing assumption of responsibility, it is directly opposite to give such responsibility to another to exercise for you, such as government.

It is my opinion, and that of the founders, that when you cede liberty to the government there is almost always a price that is more than the price that you would pay had you taken the responsibility on yourself.

Just as when you lived in your parents house and were cared for by them they expected you to follow certain rules in order to continue receiving that benefit.... it was only when you were willing to take all of the responsibility that you were able to exercise freedom...

[KingCondanomation]

George W. Bush began the movement toward Socialism

"According to the banner on the cover of Newsweek,"We Are All Socialists Now." The America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state.
The authors, Jon Meacham and Evan Thomas, believe that the transition actually started under a conservative Republican administration, which nationalized the banking and mortgage industry. George W. Bush began the movement toward Socialism when he and the Democratic controlled Congress used $700 billion dollars to bail out the banking industry.
President Bush signs historic $700 billion plan aimed at stemming credit crisis.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/03/news...lout/index.htm

It really doesn't matter who's in office now does it. The failure of conservative ideology will force more govt. intervention to keep our society alive.

So just so I have this straight, Bush started the trend to more Socialism and thus that is why conservative ideology failed and we need more government intervention?

You know what the real lesson of the last 10 years is? That Republicans aren't any better at growing/managing big government than Dems are.

[DamnYankee]

Actually freedom by definition is a lack of all responsibilities except for those you chose to uphold.

So you do agree then, that liberals want freedom from responsibility?

[DamnYankee]

And from m-w.com;

1 : the quality or state of being free: as
a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action
b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : independence
c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous <freedom from care>
d : ease, facility <spoke the language with freedom>
e : the quality of being frank, open, or outspoken <answered with freedom>
f : improper familiarity
g : boldness of conception or execution
h : unrestricted use <gave him the freedom of their home>
2 a : a political right

[Crashk]

So just so I have this straight, Bush started the trend to more Socialism and thus that is why conservative ideology failed and we need more government intervention?

No. Conservative ideology failed and thus the trent toward more liberal ideology. Even Bush knew it had to happen.

[AssHatZombie]

No. Conservative ideology failed and thus the trent toward more liberal ideology. Even Bush knew it had to happen.

that's such a blanket statement to say that "conservative ideology failed" what aspect of it? On what issue? It's a mental copout and analytically bereft of meaning.

[wanderingbear]

So you do agree then, that liberals want freedom from responsibility?

Its the ultimate form of freedom there is.Lack of responsibility.