The difference between a liberal attitude and a conservative attitude in modern society

I think that gentleman who posted the "America is the World's Leading Terrorist State" debate, has hit upon something of fundamental importance to all of us in today's divided society: The difference between a liberal attitude and a conservative attitude in modern society. Far from the liberalism of old, where beneficent ideals, were promoted to better society, today's liberals seem to be a very unhappy but vociferous lot. They find fault with those around them, become frustrated at what appears to be an inability to influence, and deem it the government's job to fix all societal ills. When confronted with the inexplicable, grossly complex, or just that which is contrary to how they feel the world should look, liberals choose to lay blame at the feet of the ubiquitous "They". Their language tends to run toward conspiratorial; supporting such notions as THEY control all the media, or THEY control all the wealth. Being impotent to fix their own problems or influence the world around them, liberals tend to fall into the role of victim, lending an inexplicable amount of credit or power to big corporations, big money, or big government. This seems to be easier than taking control of things that matter to them, and making changes from within. But the most insidious, and in my view, dangerous thing about liberalism, is their lack of tollerance. You MUST believe the way they do or you are part of the problem. A perfect example of this is in the trend to ban. Banning seems to be the liberal version of accountability. Rather than make someone accountable for their own actions, liberals feel that it is better to ban that which they see as causing a problem. Examples of this can be found in anti gun campaigns, extreme environmental movements, and all the feel good legislation, banning things that might hurt us if used improperly, but which are enjoyed without causing harm to others, by those who might feel differently than the liberal instigating the ban. Conversely, conservatives, feel that the government needs to get out of the way, and that the individual and/or the groups that individuals form and join, have the power to accomplish great things. Conservative philosophy is one of tolerance, acceptance, and belief in the individual. Conservatism does not discriminate, nor demand that you believe a certain way. It's most fundamental belief is in the accountability of the individual. This means that the individual has the ability to accomplish, and gets the credit and consequences, both good and bad, for that which they accomplish. The biggest weakness in conservatism is that we are content. We tend to be happy people. We've built our lives the way we want them, or are in the process of making changes that meet our goals. We are busy with family, playing, working, and living life in general. It takes a major event or intrusion to get conservatives to rally around a cause, to protest, or to leave their families, recreation, and work, to go out and march, protest, or rally. As conservatives, we often do not understand liberals. We wonder what kind of life they must live that they seem to have so much time to protest, gather, rally, or make a ruckus, all for the purpose of removing one more right..one more freedom, of trying to force their agenda on our lives. To us, it seems highly intrusive, and socially dysfunctional, not to mention impolite and irritating. I personally feel that each and every one of us should be allowed to lead the life we choose, go down whatever path we desire, and build the world as we see fit, as long as it does not harm others. Consequently, I only become agitated when liberal legislation banning this, that, or the other (i.e. anti-gun, anti-hunting, anti-motorized access, etc), intrudes on my ability to feed, entertain, or provide opportunity for my family, friends, and associates. Anyway, the point of all this is to thank the gentleman who started the anti-American debate, for helping point out these differences, and to suggest that he start looking at hard cold facts, rather than propaganda, or information with an agenda attached to it. If he can accomplish this, he will discover that his views might appear a bit neurotic in the cold light of reason. Discovering that he has the power to form his own life in a way that suites him best, without having to trash that which he disagrees with, could be a life transforming event for him. I suggest that he explore this path, and start ignoring the over simplified but loudly spoken proclamations that feed into his fears and fantasies, because they only fuel unhappiness and discontent with life…they do not provide solutions or fix problems. In fact they do not even identify problems…such proclamations only invent that which does not exist, and dilute any legitimate attempts to find serious solutions to real problems. Failing that, I would like to lovingly suggest that the gentleman think about moving to a more hospitable country. I'm sure he would find countries like Iran, Russia, China, North Korea, etc, to be much more to his liking. In contrast to his version of America, he will find these benign, beneficent, gentle countries and their accompanying regimes, philosophies, and human rights records, to be conducive to his desires and dreams.