Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Liberal is NOT a dirty word!

Posted by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 3:50 PM
  • 43 Replies

 I have noticed some people referring to Liberals with disdain as though it is a bad thing. Here is an essay I found online that pretty much sums up how I feel about it.


Since When is Being Liberal a Bad Thing?

10/27/02

by Gary Cobb

This morning I watched ABC's This Week with George Stephanopolis as
they eulogized Senator Paul Wellstone as a principled and dedicated public servant with deep convictions. But overall, the pundits on this show
and other television commentators continuously focus on the fact that
Wellstone was "liberal" as if he was a well-meaning chap but inherently
misguided and flawed as a result, someone that was only tolerated in the
senate rather than deeply respected.

Moreover, if you watch the TV shows like Hardball, Crossfire, Meet The
Press, etc., you consistently hear right-wing, conservative Republicans
like George Will, Robert Novak, Tucker Carlson, Rush Limbaugh and a
host of others spit out the word "liberal" with the same pompous tone or
inflection they would use to describe a child molester. Since when is
being liberal a bad thing?

Liberals have stood by and allowed so-called conservatives to take a
very positive and wonderfully descriptive word and turn it into an
invective to describe someone they view as out of touch with reality,
socially repulsive and despicable. Read here the Webster's Dictionary
definition of the word.

liberal - 1. adj. giving freely, giving more than is necessary or usual
|| generously large, more in quantity than is necessary or usual, a
liberal reward || involving a general enlarging of the mind beyond the
merely professional or technical, a liberal education || not subject to
the common prejudices or conventions, a liberal mind || admitting more
than is directly expressed, not sticking to the letter, a liberal interpretation of the rules || (politics) favorably to individual liberty, social reform and the removal of economic restraints,  admitting a free
interpretation of religious doctrine and of its application to ritual and conduct.

Excuse me! What is wrong with any of that? Who could be against anyone who aspired to any of those attributes or philosophical attitudes? I
suggest that Senator Paul Wellstone was all of that and more. Among politicians he was an icon for liberalism and gave the idea of being liberal
a physical reference point. He was someone to be highly admired, the people's friend, the liberal's liberal. Compared to a Bush or a Cheney,
Wellstone is a "real" American hero, by God!

On the other hand, while true liberals are worthy of Webster's description, consider the word "conservative" from the same dictionary.

conservative - 1. adj. desiring to preserve existing institutions, and thus opposed to radical changes (tending or desiring to conserve) ||
(loosely) moderate, cautious, a conservative estimate || old-fashioned || considered to involve little risk, a conservative investment || tending
to preserve, keep from deteriorating.

Whoa! Does this describe those labeled "conservative", the Republicans?
Does this describe George Bush and  his administration? A preponderance of evidence suggests otherwise.

Desiring to preserve existing institutions? As in preserving Social Security? The right to vote? The Florida election debacle suggests that
conservative Republicans are trying to destroy existing institutions, not preserve them. Democracy as an example. How about our constitution, our freedoms? The Bush administration is attempting to dismantle the constitution.

Opposed to radical change? As in breaking international treaties? And the plan for global dominance of all other nations? To establish an
American empire? The sweeping changes involved in their plans for Homeland security resulting in the loss of freedoms we have enjoyed since this republic was formed?

Moderate, cautious, considered to involve little risk? Would that be the decision and headlong rush to preemptively invade Iraq and declare
war on other nations in the Middle East? And all of the other issues mentioned in the paragraph above including the plan to privatize social
security?

Tending or desiring to conserve? Like our forests, areas of natural beauty, our wildlife and our natural resources? Oh yeah! That's them
alright. Wonderful conservationists, aren't they?

Tending to preserve, keep from deteriorating? And that would be? Our economy? The national debt? Our environment? The purity of our air and
water? The quality of our land? Our democracy? Our liberties? The goodwill and cooperative spirit among the United states and our allies?

And the Wills, Novaks and Limbaughs of this world have the gall and the arrogance to proudly call themselves "conservative" and to ridicule
those who exhibit intelligence, logical and rational thought, who are compassionate to all, who consider the long-term results of their actions
and proceed carefully and cautiously in the direction that is best for all people and all nations, by calling them what conservatives consider
a dirty word, "liberal".

For all the Republicans out there, you need to choose your labels more carefully. You obviously don't understand the meaning of either word,
"conservative" or "liberal", and you're giving true conservatives a bad name.



I am a proud Liberal.

 


Thank God......it's Friday!!!

by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
ain-gell72
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 3:53 PM

al-RIGHT-y then!

Goodwoman614
by Satan on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:03 PM

Good find, friday.  Thanks for posting. 

"I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit."

                                         

                                                             

Eilish
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM

A classic liberal is not a bad thing; in fact a classic liberal is (by today's standards) a libertarian. But what we have are social liberals; those liberals are geared towards socialism and that IS bad.

MissBearNMonkey
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:05 PM

I loved this when I first read it. Was that really seven years ago?? RIP Paul Wellstone. We lost a great American when we lost him.

2002 was a tough time for a liberal, I'll tell ya.

  SPEAK OUT! News & Debate


BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS!

MissBearNMonkey
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:06 PM

Fiscal liberals are the ones you're thinking of. Social liberals are just more open-minded about social stuff like sexuality, religion, stuff like that. I have many fiscal conservatives/social liberals in my family. LOL.

Quoting Eilish:

A classic liberal is not a bad thing; in fact a classic liberal is (by today's standards) a libertarian. But what we have are social liberals; those liberals are geared towards socialism and that IS bad.


  SPEAK OUT! News & Debate


BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS!

momandvet
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:08 PM

Oh really because when I say social liberal....I mean I support gay marriage, I think drugs should be decriminalized, I am pro-choice, you know socially I am a liberal.

I don't know any socialist myself...most of us are smart enough to know socialism wouldn't work.

Quoting Eilish:

A classic liberal is not a bad thing; in fact a classic liberal is (by today's standards) a libertarian. But what we have are social liberals; those liberals are geared towards socialism and that IS bad.


Goodwoman614
by Satan on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:11 PM

'so.k, folks.  Dem what have the biggest mouths often shoot 'em off...w/o knowing what they're talking about.


(and they're usually blind to their own ignorance)



"I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit."

                                         

                                                             

MissBearNMonkey
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:11 PM

EXACTLY! It's like the word "social" has become the new liberal!

Quoting momandvet:

Oh really because when I say social liberal....I mean I support gay marriage, I think drugs should be decriminalized, I am pro-choice, you know socially I am a liberal.

I don't know any socialist myself...most of us are smart enough to know socialism wouldn't work.

Quoting Eilish:

A classic liberal is not a bad thing; in fact a classic liberal is (by today's standards) a libertarian. But what we have are social liberals; those liberals are geared towards socialism and that IS bad.

 


  SPEAK OUT! News & Debate


BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS! BRAINY BOOKS!

margroc
by on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:16 PM

In Canada to be a Liberal is pretty much a good thing or at the very least the norm.  As a matter of fact I would bet that our Conservatives would probably be called Liberals here.

A society which emphasizes uniformity is one which creates intolerance and hate.  - Pierre E. Trudeau

Swtdreamerbaby
by Member on Aug. 12, 2009 at 4:19 PM

lol love it

Quoting ain-gell72:

al-RIGHT-y then!


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)