[CJFusco]

I think this might be the first congenial conversation between liberals and conservatives on this board that hasn't devolved into a kind of monosylabalic pissing contest.

What most liberals and conservatives fail to recognize is that BOTH SIDES HAVE VALID POINTS... the disagreements occur depending on what issues hold precedent in the mind of that individual. Usually, when a liberal and a conservative disagree on a wider issue (the war in Iraq), it is because they disagree on details (the liberals cannot accept a pre-emptive war waged with no proof, the conservatives are attempting to protect the well-being of our homeland), not because the disagree with the basic concept. Every intelligent person would avoid a war if at all possible; since liberals and conservatives disagree on the fundamental reason for going to this war, the disagreement on details gets lost among all the labelling of "Pro-War" or "Anti-War".

I personally am wary of anyone that identifies themselves (politically) with a particular "ism." As soon as one says, "I am a Liberal/ Conservative/ Anarchist/ Communist/ Socialist/ Leninist/ Marxist/ Trotskyist/ Fascist" they immediately polarize themselves and can quickly begin to fall prey to that "side's" dogma, and can thereby become blind to the fact that there are, say, valid arguments for AND against Affirmative Action, Abortion, Universal Health Care, Gun Control, Imperialistic Colonialization, etc etc. The arguments always occur in the details.