The first mistake you make is confusing Democrats of forty to fifty years ago with the Democrats of today (by which I mean the leadership of the party, not the average Democratic voter.) We are not talking about Roosevelt, Truman, JFK, or even Johnson any more.

Deal with what you've got running the party now. All the others died a long time ago.

To invoke Hegel or a few other Republicans to show even-handed oppostion is as silly as invoking Leiberman on the other side. Leiberman's support of the war doesn't make that support "bipartisan" any more than Hegel's opposition, which has been long-standing, and not the recent phenomenon people are trying to paint it as.

A liberal philosophy tends to be an open-minded, all options on the table one, where even the views of diverse groups can come into the mix.

I can't believe how many people can say things like this without laughing to the point of getting the hiccups. The modern liberal movement is about as rigid as anything I've ever seen, with specific and narrow views on almost every subject. Getting off the reservation on any one of them can get a liberal booted out of the club. Look around you. Where are the pro-war liberals in the Democratic Party or any major liberal organization, including academia? Pro-life? Global warming skeptics? Believers in private solutions to problems instead of government ones?

Oh, I can point out some liberal individuals with a wider range of views (there are a few on this board). Even in the polls none of the Democratic voters polled come out 100 percent on anything--but they don't rise very far in the system.

If you point out to me any influential liberal or leftist in the public eye, I can tell you within a millimeter his or her position on almost anything at all. Most of them do very little actual analysis, with a ready supply of talking points on the tip of their tongues.

Granted, there are many on the right that fall into this same category. But then you wouldn't argue that, would you? It's the left that's broad-minded and enlightened in your opinion, not the right.

Diverse? Give me a break. Look at what happened to Leiberman. This board is an oasis of tolerance. The abuse inflicted on commenters (or even authors) on liberal boards out there, the second they step one inch off the party line, has to be seen to be believed.

BTW, you are correct that Republican ideals support minimal foreign involvements. I'm just not sure how well that would work any more.