one of us... one of us... one of us...
You'll like being on the side that supports funding public education, providing health care to those who can't afford it, keeping the environment clean, and not letting corporations dictate the rules of business.
Speaking seriously though, you raise an interesting dichotomy. The "Right" in America vehemently opposes government-provided or sponsored welfare, on the grounds that society can and should provide for it's own unfortunate. Or at least gives lipservice to the idea, since they never provide an answer to why there's still a percieved need for more charity that never gets provided. Except maybe that people are taxed too much to give to charity or something equally inane.
We on the "Left" on the other hand, are ironically labeled the "good guys" for wanting the government to step up to the 'charity' plate, precisely because we don't trust human nature enough to expect society to take care of it's own out of pocket. Or rather, we take the more nuanced view that most people simply can't afford to give out much themselves. If I were being vindictive (and I always am), I would say it's because we assert that the Right shoots it's own rhetoric in the foot by allowing the already wealthy to horde more wealth, despite provably not giving a damn about the underprivileged by and large, so there's just not enough money to go around for everyone at the bottom.
This has been Aqizzar, your guide to cynical liberalism. If you'd like to know more, please take a pamphlet on your way out. Join us later for our symposium - "How Libertarian-Aligned Conservatives Are Restricting Your Personal Life More Than The ACLU Ever Will."
Fuck I had to edit that a lot.