Skip to main content

The Reluctant Liberal


I've a grandson that has been exposed to political liberalism all his life. In it's modern version the words "left wing" means the liberal side of politics, and "right wing" describes the more conservative side. In our two party system each term may be used to describe a member of either party. Believe it or not, there are a few conservative Democrats.

Today, the Democratic Party has become  overwhelmingly "liberal" and the Republican Party more conservative.  At times it has been difficult to find enough reasonable cooperation between parties and that is, unfortunately, how it is today. With President Trump now in the saddle, the Democratic Party has refused any level of cooperation -  and our government has slowed to a walk.


The simple explanation is probably the correct one. The hard left wing, usually members of the Democratic Party, allows no other point of view. They each consider moderate and conservative opposing ideas to have no merit. This is becoming a serious problem. In my view, when one side refuses to consider opposing ideas or concepts, any discussion and debate is worthless, and there can be no progress.


America's newly elected President Trump is a controversial figure quite unlike the usual model of a buttoned down, black tie, polititian. The shock of his comparatively coarse demeanor plus the reversal of many established government rules and activities has caused an unprecedented upheaval among America's allies, our enemies, and particularly our own electorate. The hard left liberals are actually  attempting to get our government to fail.

Yet it is clear that, despite the angry, savage, and unhinged protests of ultra-liberals, socialists, fascists, and others, progress is being made. They have slowed the return of common sense, ethical conduct, and national resolve to "Make America Great" again. For all his braggadocio and bluster, Mr. Trump has an excellent grasp on several key areas of government, a superior knowledge of world affairs, and understands the reasons for discontent among our citizens. He is trying to address them all, and quickly. 

Meanwhile, the protests have turned into riots with the unhappy liberals breaking windows and heads to make their point. Apparently, they absolutely hate President Trump and all he stands for. They fail to realize that they lost the election. Granted, Hillary Clinton, with all of the Clinton ethical, moral, and legal entanglements,  was not the best candidate. But that is not why Mr. Trump won the election. The majority of American citizens really did want to "drain the swamp". The liberal elite had moved America more and more towards "liberalism". The voters preferred a return to the more traditional road to individual freedoms, a smaller and less controlling government, reduction of the national debt, control over unrestricted immigration, and a common sense approach to government.


The radical and extreme liberals in the Democratic Party condemn this agenda. They hysterically proclaim the "sky is falling", the "end of the world has come", and all because of President Trump. Their attitude is beyond stupid. It has, in fact, become anti-American.  



 










Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Gloves Off

. OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BETRAYED OUR TRUST AGAIN. Whether we are Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference at all. Our legislators voted according to "what's best for them". It was clear that the people want to reduce the costs and improve access to our overall health care system. It was also VERY CLEAR that they did not want the 2000 page legislative monstrosity that was produced by a small number of far left liberal Democrats, who worked behind closed doors to fashion a pork filled blunderbuss that virtually no one has been able to read, or discuss, or debate, or offer alternatives to specific unreasoned clauses. It is (now) a BAD BILL , passed by BAD POLITICIANS, that compose a BAD MINORITY segment of America's out-of-control government. AND WE HAVE NO LOGICAL WAY TO PAY FOR IT EITHER. The far left liberals like to point at  SOCIAL SECURITY   as a text book success. They are wrong and will not admit it despite the concrete evide

Why Blackwater Mercenaries

Over some years the name Blackwater shows  up in the news. It is, by their own estimation, the largest mercenary group in the world. I think I first noticed it when reports from Iraq mentioned they were employed (by whom?) to escort and protect members of the Iraqi government from place to place. Then I became aware that they had joined several of the firefights between our marines and Iraqi enemies. I wondered just how these mercenaries (that supposedly came from the United States) were  hired by someone (who?) to fight? That led to the question of just who would be responsible if a situation involved the accidental killing of an innocent bystander? It  might be a little sticky for an unauthorised mercenary contracted by the United States but not a member of our military forces.  Or suppose a Blackwater type killed a military Iraqi combatant and was then captured by the enemy. Would he be treated as a spy, or as a American combatant, or whatelse?  And would the Geneva Convention

Sarah-palin-itus

. Am I the only one that watches the liberal roar caused by the soccer mom . . . and laughs?   I suspect Sarah is a nice and decent person who will eventually prove to be a better political critic than elected official. But who knows. She projects an effervescent personality, a better than average intelligence, and solid conservative values. Still,  as a political leader of consequence I suspect she is a female Peter. You do remember THE PETER PRINCIPLE don't you. Dixon