Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Centrism... Is Basically Saying... You're A Reagan Democrat... [View all]WillyT
(72,631 posts)36. I Would Just Like A Tiny Bit Of Commitment...
***************************************************************
JFK - Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
September 14, 1960
<snip>
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal" to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.
In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my political credo:
I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.
I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them.
Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends...
<snip>
More: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/jfk-nyliberal/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I guess being against compulsory pregnancy and for a $9.00 minimum wage offsets the other stuff
Doctor_J
Nov 2013
#58
Eh, you're asking for evidence that you didn't bother to supply for your claim?
Fumesucker
Nov 2013
#32
"Sitting out an election ...The extremist Left have done this in recent years"
LondonReign2
Nov 2013
#43
From a thread by neverforget: 2010 midterm voter turnout: Who gets the blame? Independents
myrna minx
Nov 2013
#49
I presented the evidence that demonstrated that the "left" didn't sit out the 2010 midterm.
myrna minx
Nov 2013
#65
You said the "extremist left" sat out elections in recent years. The most recent contentious
myrna minx
Nov 2013
#67
The fact is people sometimes have a mix of views that are both left and right.
hrmjustin
Nov 2013
#8
Single payer insurance, fully funded education up to 16 years, cut the Defense Budget by half
libdem4life
Nov 2013
#19
It's a long way from a Reagan Democrat re OP and I see few of these values being supported these
libdem4life
Nov 2013
#22
Well, since I called BS on the OP definition, don't expect me to support or explain it.
riqster
Nov 2013
#24
Would you mind posting a clear list of the acceptable Democratic positions?
brooklynite
Nov 2013
#26
No, No... This Is Much Easier... Please Define The Republican Ideas/Policies You Embrace...
WillyT
Nov 2013
#27
Just a couple of years ago, the 'Centrist' postition on marriage equality was 'Civl Unions are the
Bluenorthwest
Nov 2013
#44
...and if Civil Unions had never been implemented, we might still be arguing about marriage equality
brooklynite
Nov 2013
#45
That's hilarious for so many reasons! First, we are still fighting for marriage equality, we are
Bluenorthwest
Nov 2013
#50
Isn't this *exactly* what centrists believe? We have a drone-killing apologist who posts frequently
Romulox
Nov 2013
#46
They did... It just doesn't happen to conform to your personal gold standard...
Decaffeinated
Nov 2013
#56