Neil Gould wrote:


Please. Such positions are ignorantly Fascistic, not liberal. Trying to
sell us on the idea that record deficits are of no concern is liberal.
Fiscal irresponsibility is liberal. So, if the party embraces those that
hold such views, one merely has to decide where they stand on such points.
I don't find the choice all that hard to make.

Interesting. I've been under the belief that "liberal" referred to the
freedom with which one read the Constitution and related documents. A
"conservative" reading limits government to what's described, a "liberal"
reading permit government to do whatever the reader thinks the authors
would have intended had they written the documents in the current era.

So what you're calling "liberal" above (a lack of fiscal responsibility) I'd
simply call "stupid" at best (at worse: dishonest, robbing future funds to
buy today's elections). As I understood the term, "liberal" is getting the
federal government involved in defining marriage, or in passing laws
granting the federal government more snooping rights.

Hmm...I suppose that this makes the tariffs not liberal but stupid (or
worse) by my own definition.

However, even using your definition, we've still a pretty liberal
administration in office today: tax breaks combined with war spending?
Deficits rising without consideration of consequences?

What's a good conservative to do?

- Andrew