Definition of Liberalism

Start off with another definition first ...

Insanity ... doing something that gives you the same result over and over again, expecting a different result.

One way to define liberalism, at least its current manifestation in American politique, is by the fact that you get all the credit for your attempt to do something, and not the result. In other words ... idiots like LBJ, that gave us the ongoing disaster that is the Great Society, are heroes because he *tried* to eliminate poverty, nevermind the devastating results.

This is why a solid sound of "cease fire" is coming from the left in this country. Yes it is easy to come up with alternative explanations you hear daily from conservative circles ...

- hate bushism (Bush supports Israel and opposes a "feel good" cease fire) ... no matter what
- weak on defense
- pro-terrorist or anti-"war on terrorism"
... and on and on

However I think the roots of liberalism can just as easily explain the left's position ... you have to do something, anything ... to make us "feel good". Never mind if that something is a temporary "quick fix" that ultimately makes things far worse in the long run. You mix the "feel good - quick fix" mentality with the "anti-war" lunacy and you get "cease fire" against Israel.

You look at a lot of the problems ... terrorism, attacks on Isreal, North Korea, Iran nukes, etc. ... and you will find some "feel good" temp fix that was implemented years ago that allowed the disease to "fester". But that is nothing real new. What is new, and completely insane, is that the lunatic Democraps are overwhelmingly pushing to replace the failed policies with *EXACTLY* the same policies that failed in the first place. Terrorists ... let's treat them nice and try to understand them (i.e. buy them off) and maybe they'll stop ... been there, did that. Cease fire and get Isreal out of Lebanon and replace them with UN soldiers ... I suppose Hezbollah might be running out of missiles, eh? Again, been there, done that. North Korea started violating the Clinton / Carter deal from the word go ... so we should go ahead and negotiate another deal with them? Yeah, right!

The funniest thing is that when you actually confront a liberal lunatic with exactly the fact that what they want had already been done and failed ... they will look at you with a straight face and say "yeah, but now will be different". Yeah, now the big, bad french will enforce the disarmament of Hezbollah ... seems the French had such great success disarming the Germans in WW II, I guess we're expecting a repeat of that great Franco-success, eh? Seriously though ... how will things be different?

"Well, they just will" ... the UN will *really* mean it this time!

Mind if I puke?

Conservative "absolutism"

However, it would not appear that conservatives have much of a better solution ... at least not within the context of what we will actually do. Liberals wanted to hold Iraq at bay indefinitely ... which was obviously working against us. Conservatives wanted to take Saddam out ... well we did that be we were not willing to completely annihilate the bad guys. So now we have the cesspool ... an Iraq without a strong-armed dictator but with seemingly thousands or millions of really bad people.

Conservative solution in middle east war is to "disarm" Hezbollah. The liberals want to do exactly what failed before. Yet while the conservative solution "sounds" good, it is only possible by a bloodbath / genocide that I believe we are not willing to swallow.

So then what good is conservative rhetoric?