ARE YOU A LIBERAL? TAKE THE TEST.

I took the test and now, I, (aka thinkingblue), without a doubt can claim that I am a proud liberal (As if I really needed to take a test to show me the way I THINK...)

I've been what the political philosophers refer to as a "Liberal" for all my political life. I joined (or fell into) this belief system because my parents were liberals. But they rarely talked of their beliefs except for voting day and since my father was only 45 years of age when he died, I can only remember one occasion of them going off to the polls to vote for Adley Stevenson.

After my dad's death, my mother never voted again. She was not financially responsible and when you live off social security alone, you'd better possess some liable brain cells with the few bucks a month you receive or you will starve. And so food absence, for my 4 brothers and me, on many occasions, became the norm. I believe that is what attracted me to Liberalism, (Experiencing suffering in my own home because of budgeting ignorance).

My mother's other sin, (besides financial irresponsibility) was processing a false pride. She went to a government food distribution facility to collect such bulk staples as cheese, peanut butter and powdered milk, once or twice but found the experience quite humiliating and never went back... So hunger rejoined our family.

You don't ask to be born nor do you have a choice as to what type of guardian/parent you will receive. Little children who have to live in abject poverty because they were conceived by unenlightened, uninformed and yes, ignorant parents (who were raised possibly by the same) are one of the main reasons for Liberalism. The very old and the very young are the vulnerable ones in any society. They have little or no tools for survival. And if government can't help them, most will fall prey to the very dark side of life. Pain and despair for these unfortunates are a way of life.

There are people who care about their fellow human beings but they usually can do little to lift those who have fallen between the cracks out of their dilemma. The weakest of any culture need legal safety nets. These nets provide mainstays not only for those in need but also for the rest of the members of a society, because when people do not have to be bothered by the neediest amongst them, all will be able to live a better humane life. Like it are not, WE ARE ALL A PART OF A LARGER WHOLE. thinkingblue

The RED DOT on the Chart shows where thinkingblue fits on the political map.

Your PERSONAL issues Score is 80%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 10%.

According to your answers, the political group that agrees with you most is...

LIBERALS usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant government control of the

economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net"
to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation

......................................................................

12,097,234

Other Political Philosophies

Right (Conservative)
Conservatives tend to favor economic freedom, but frequently

support laws to restrict personal behavior that violates "traditional
values." They oppose excessive government control of business, while

economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one
that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.

Centrist
Centrists espouse a "middle ground" regarding government control

support individual freedom of choice. Centrists pride themselves on
keeping an open mind, tend to oppose "political extremes," and

Statist (Big Government)
Statists want government to have a great deal of power over the

Okay, what exactly is a liberal, anyway?

How you can help support this project

Help us spread theword about this Quiz!

Learn more about the Quiz and the Advocates

Want to learn a bit more about libertarianism?

As I wandered through the crowd at the Denver Tea Party protest last week, I was struck by just how paper-thin is the movement’s opposition to government power.

The Tea Party movement is clearly a "Conservative" movement in its membership and core philosophy, and therefore it is not surprising that many of the very same people who now loudly claim to oppose government spending and taxation, were the very same people who, for the last eight years, had been cheerleaders for one of the most profligate administrations in American history.

And yet, here they were at the Tea Party, pretending to be principled opponents of government power.

Indeed, the existence of the Tea Party events only raises the question of why such events hadn’t ever been organized at some point during the Bush years. After all, for the last eight years, the government has spent record sums of money and all the time, the national debt barreled toward 10 trillion dollars.

Unfortunately for this column, I was too polite to ask any of the protestors questions like "How exactly is it that you just suddenly realized that tax rates are high and that government spending is out of control?"

Or perhaps: "I like your little sign that says ‘Stop the Spending!’ How ’bout we save hundreds of billions immediately by bringing all the troops home?"

For a Conservative, of course, the answer to that last question is always "no." Spending taxpayer money is always fine as long as it’s spent on killing foreigners.

The real reason that Conservatives have suddenly discovered a distrust of government, of course, is that they’re out of power. It’s not as if the deficit wasn’t outrageously large last year, and it’s not as if the Bush administration wasn’t out-spending even the LBJ administration on all its pork projects, endless wars, and prescription drug programs for eight long years.

The GOP, the Party extolled by Conservatives every two years as mankind’s last great hope for civilization, racked up deficits and spent sums of money far greater than that ever suggested by Clinton or Carter, and yet now, all of a sudden, Conservatives turn out and would have us believe that they’re opposed to big government.

For those of us who remember the Clinton years, the faux libertarianism proffered by the Conservative movement these days is a depressing re-enactment of the anti-government populism that was common during the nineties.

Back then, prominent Conservatives actually used phrases like "jack-booted thugs" to describe federal agents, and Clinton’s wars were commonly condemned by Conservatives as unconstitutional, illegal and immoral. The militia movement was increasingly popular, and the Clinton administration’s anti-terrorism act of 1996 was criticized by Conservatives for the broad police powers it afforded to federal agents.

Clinton’s "humanitarian" wars in Haiti and Serbia were condemned as adventurism, and Clinton’s budgets, fantastically restrained by today’s standards, were condemned as being much too large and irresponsible.

During the nineties, portraying the government as a malevolent force became a national pastime. Shows like The X-Files were popular and movies like Enemy of the State made millions at the box office. Conservative publications and writers noted with approval such skeptical visions of government power, and the Waco massacre and Ruby Ridge became symbols of victimization at the hands of government agents.

Yet, after the Republicans took control of the White House, Conservatives dutifully performed an about-face on all of these issues.

After 9/11, any war, anywhere on earth, was acceptable to the Conservatives. Even "humanitarian" wars became acceptable after it became apparent that the Al-Qaedaconnection and the Weapons of Mass Destructionwouldn’t hold up as rationales for the Iraq invasion. Saddam was removed as a great humanitarian act, and that was enough for the Conservatives.

The massive expansion of police powers for federal agents increased at a gallop under Bush, but the conservatives who had condemned Waco and Clinton’s anti-terrorism power-grabs defended far more drastic expansions of government police power under Bush.

And then there was the runaway government spending under Bush. The crushing cost of the Iraqand Afghan wars were ignored by Conservatives as they all rushed to find another endless military conflict to replace their precious Cold War.

The massive burden of Bush’s prescription drug benefit, and even Bush’s 800 billion dollar bailoutwere not enough to precipitate anything like the Tea Parties of the Obama era.

And Obama is indeed the reason that Conservatives have suddenly realized that they’re supposed to be opposed to big government.

Lacking any type of consistent intellectual framework, the Conservative movement instead fixates on personalities rather than policies.

The Tea Parties are really anti-Obama protests masquerading as protests against the size and scope of government. As the last eight years have made crystal clear, calls for cuts in taxes and government are just a Conservative ploy, and what really drives Conservatives are issues like nationalism, immigration, abortion, and sticking it to the undeserving poor.

Given the Conservative movement's performance during the last eight years, the Conservatives can't possibly be opposed to Obama's taxing and spending policies on principle. No, Conservatives start from a personal and emotional disdain for Obama, and then search for policies to oppose. If John McCain were president, and the government were bailing out its friends at the same rate that it is now (which it almost certainly would be), would the Conservatives be protesting with nearly as much vigor? Only the most naïve among us could claim such a thing with a straight face.

No, Conservatives oppose Obama because they despise him on a cultural level. Obama represents the culture of the urban coastal leftists who promote social policies the Conservatives loathe, and since he’s a Democrat and not their man, they’ve taken to the streets. On matters of war and fiscal policy, Bush and Obama differ only to the slightest degree, but culturally, the two are worlds apart.

Egged on by Conservative talk show hosts, the Conservatives, who believe that the country is being taken over by Muslims and illegal aliens, have done what they’ve always done. They’ve made the centerpiece of their campaign the ever-popular and libertarian issue of tax-cuts and small government.

Conservatives have been doing this since the fifties. In order to enhance the popularity of their cause, they pretend to be the ideology of low-taxes and decreased spending, espousing the many benefits of austere government.

Then, as soon as they are in power, they quickly forget all about the ideals of small government and focus on what really matters to them: nationalism, war, and doling out the spoils of political victory to their friends.

So yes, the Tea Party protestors are right that Obama is spending recklessly, and they’re right that deficits are out of control, and they’re right that taxes are outrageously high.

But their inconsistency on these issues is embarrassingly obvious. And for those of us who can remember the last time the Conservatives pretended to oppose big government, we’ll just unhappily wait for the next time a Republican is in office and all the Conservatives suddenly realize that big government is fine as long as their guy is in charge.