I want to be clear that this is not an attempt to get into a debate about conservatism vs. liberalism. If you guys want to do that, have at it. I just wanted to share a very interesting comment I saw in another discussion group. The topic asks the question why are people so upset about liberalism. Many of the forum participants are not from the United States, and even a few who do live in America, haven't figured out all the fuss. I've only read comments from 1 of 3 pages, but so far, most of those responding either have no clue about these terms, are extremists (alarmists?) from the right who support the notion that to be liberal is to be basically anything unrighteous, or are giving technical, historical explanations of the terms.
Now that I'm done with the fanfare, here's the concerto. I bolded the parts I think everybody needs to heed.

The term liberal, as used by the right, especially talk radio, is intentionally vague. The demagogues who rail against "the liberals"want it to mean anybody opposed to their side. If they aren't with us they are against us. In the process they intentionally distort the intentions of the left to rile up their following, playing up on all their collective fears and prejudices.
They label any action by the government on behalf of its citizens as "Communism" because that has a connotation of totalitarianism. People are scared off by "Big government" so if you ask people, "are you against big government" you get a resounding yes. But if you ask them if they like medicare or social security or the VA (all the very epitome of big government) you get an even more resounding "absolutely"
The most radical conservatives are also not the norm, but they are the voice of the right. I hear a lot more lecturing from them than I ever do from liberals. The important thing is to separate out the noise makers from the populace. This is true on both sides, but right now, the extremists on the right have control of most of the media (no matter what you still hear about the media being liberal, it is conservatives who own most of it) and so they distort what conservatives are all about by their actions and what liberals are about by their words.

For me, the term liberal is very clear. In both Canada, and the United States they tend to (and remember, I'm talking about a trend here -- and therefore, say tend to) believe the following things:

1. They are more against war and military spending than conservatives.
2. They favor recognizing alternate lifestyles as legal relationships more than conservatives.
3. They are interested in putting laws in place that tend to engineer society around their values, which are different from the status quo, than conservatives.
4. They tend to be more in favor of government social programs like health care, than conservatives.
5. They are more in favor of gun control that most conservatives.
6. They tend to want greater controls on big business and prefer to see more power, from a business standpoint, invested in the workers and consumers.
7. They tend to be more open to immigration policies which change the current ethnic balance of their nation than conservatives.
8. Compared to conservatives, they tend to favor personal moral philsophies to values disseminated by organized religion. They often try to pass laws which minimize the influence of Churches and traditional Christianity, such as outlawing prayers in schools, displays of the Bible in public, etcetera, moreso than conservatives.
9. They seek to eleveate the status of women, disabled people, and minorities in society more than conservatives.
10. They are more willing to sacrifice individual freedoms for laws that promote what they feel is the common social, "good", than conservatives.
11. They tend to want to tax a wide variety of activities to fund their programs than conservatives.
12. They are more willing to control and influence markets through legislation than conservatives, and often put in place a wider range of consumer protection laws.
13. Then tend to be more willing to use the elementary and secondary school systems to teach society values that conservatives would rather place in the hands of parents.
14. They are more interested in protecting the environment than conservatives.
15. They are more willing to offer protection to people convicted of crimes, than to protecting victims, than conservatives.


Now, before anyone goes saying -- "I'm liberal and that's not me", recognize I'm speaking in trends here on issues that I've seen debated hotly over the years.

bwardmusic - that is an excellent summary on the differences. Very accurate I might add.

I would say Fox News is the only TV network that leans more conservative than liberal yet probably presents more of the opposing view than the other networks (if that makes sense). Not sure how anyone could deny that ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC or CNN don't lean heavily on the liberal side. So that seems like a big imbalance for the conservative TV voice. Newspapers around the country follow the lead of the very liberal NY Times. I do not have statistics but from data have read in the past, newspapers (as most journalists) are vast majority liberal leaning. Some do a pretty good job presenting both views. Wall Street Jounal is the only paper that is clearly conservative leaning.

On the talk radio circuit, liberal radio seems to always fail. It is my opnion that a large reason for this is that many liberals tend to view the USA in a very negative light. That the USA and what it stands for is evil and is the true source of the world's problems. This type of constant negativity combined with the squashing of core traditional values we once adhered to 30-40 years ago does not go over very well with Americans.

That is a rather good comparison of the two sides. I would take issue with number eight though, only because it makes it sound so black and white. If you are a liberal then you are or should be anti church. In fact there are parts of both factions in most religions. So it becomes a little hazy when you attempt to bring in the question of religion. I was raised a Methodist which by most accounts is a fairly liberal thinking faith, but a large enough one to have a conservative element to its ranks as well. Even our seminaries are broad reaching in teaching.

Brings religion and politics together does tend to make for some strange bedfellows at times.

One could argue that true conservativism has not existed since Einsenhower. I would be hardpressed to think of one true conservative.

From a fiscal standpoint I would say Regan was the last.

The deficit nearly tripled during the Reagan presidency, partly due to tax cuts and increases in defense spending (e.g., Star Wars missile shield). He inherited a $995 billion National Debt in 1981, and by the end of his second term, it had risen to $2.9 Trillion, even though he raised taxes twice.

Reagan was hardly fiscally conservative.

Reagnomics

Jeez....you will argue about anything won't you.

I recall how the great Jimmy Carter gutted the military and left the economy in complete shambles upon his departure. The Prime Rate was over 15% with staggering inflation levels.

(from Wikipedia)
According to a 1996 study from the libertarian think tank Cato Institute:

On 8 of the 10 key economic variables examined, the American economy performed better during the Reagan years than during the pre- and post-Reagan years.

Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.

Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.

The only economic variable that was worse in the Reagan period than in both the pre- and post-Reagan years was the savings rate, which fell rapidly in the 1980s.

The productivity rate was higher in the pre-Reagan years but much lower in the post-Reagan years.

Steve, regarding your first comment in this thread, I ask that unless you know people personally and can attest to their political leanings, please do not say "most journalists" do anything.

Sorry Woody. I should have been more specific or provided some back-up. Nowadays I think there are many liberal journalists labeling theselves as moderates for obvious reasons of credibility. Interesting read here.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker...al-conservative