By Beauty Damned

The term liberal starting being a dirty word about 15 years ago. It's silly. I think that you should always be proud of who you are. I'm no more ashamed of my conservatism now than I was of my liberalism in my 20's.

Take your word back, girl! There ain't nothin' wrong with it.

Something that I failed to mention in my post was how much it bothers me that liberals seem to acquiesce to the whole notion that the word "liberal" has some negative connotation and try to downplay their "liberalism" to seem more PC, or maybe it's not PC, maybe it's just a total lack of backbone. Anyway, I'm proud of my leftist upbringing and principles and I think others should be too, rather than attempting to shrug off the label. If you ask me, that's the number one problem with the democratic party. Not enough backbone.

If more liberals would stand up, show some backbone and be proud of their values - the liberal is a bad word would go away.

You're right, when then bend and try to avoid the label they are playing into the sterotype that being liberal is bad. That is the main reason that I call myself the Queen of All Evil. Conservatives are called evil and I am embracing it. My slogan is flipping the bird at the notion that conservatism = evil.

"If more liberals would stand up, show some backbone and be proud of their values..."

It'll never happen.

Don't be so confident Gordon, it may just bite you in the ass.

The term 'Liberal' is said with disdain for the same motivation(s) that you 'label' Republican/conservative as principles of selfishness, greed, violence and self-entitlement - lack of understanding that not everyone will have your values or the same priorities as you.

Sauce for the goose Maria....

Mikey - your turning this into a vicious circle. Even one of your champions (Rose) has admitted that the word "liberal" was turned into a "bad lable" by the conservatives 15 years ago. Not the other way around. Even if there are libs who "label" the GOP as such, it is not in such a way that the mainstream cringes when they hear the word "liberal" as if it were a dirty word.

Maria - there is a good reason the right wing has made the word "liberal" such a bad. Rose is correct, around 15 years ago communism started to crumble in our main rival countires therefore the label "commie" was no longer effective in describing someone who did not adhere to the neocon propaganda. They needed to find a new "dirty word" to describe the heathens that dare oppose them (because we all know the conservatives are righteous, wholesome and family value oriented, apple pie, baseball from sea to shining sea - just ask them, they will tell you). So "liberal" replaced "commie" although morons who we shall not name but know who they are still run around screaming pinko commie's, moonbats, etc. The 50's have been over for a long time guys, time for a new and original label.

nunya..I've spent so much time reading this blog, ya know catching up and you saying someone is turning an argument into a "vicious circle" is the pot calling the kettle black. No one, and I don't care who they are likes to be disagreed with...you can say you're open to opinions of others all day but at the end of the day you walk away with your original feelings and notions in tack.

I see this as both sides being guilty as all get out. Both sides sling a mighty fistful of mud. Both sides detest what the other is "all about"...and about that "time for a new original label"....come on man....you wouldn't like the new name either....If anyone could honestly say they have never uttered a bad word about the opposing party than I would understand ill feelings...HOWEVER..I don't think that's the case here.
p.s. I'm a REP but would never consider myself Righteous and I hate baseball.

I believe Bush the elder started the "liberal is a bad word" when campaigning against Dukakis. At least,I'm pretty sure that is when it started. It was campaign strategy.

Reagan did a pretty damn good job of demonizing it too. it's just after communism fell in USSR, the GOP needed a new keyword to scare people into voting for them.

“Reagan is the most popular figure in the history of the United States”. “No candidate we put up would have been able to beat Reagan this year.” Those words were said by Tip O'Neil to Walter Mondale....Reagan didn't need to demonize anyone...Jimmy Carter did that all by himself. Those voters were only scared of a rerun of Carter, don't pass the buck.

Voters then as they do now, have very short attention spans. Reagan was voted in for the Iran hostage situation, in which Reagan had nothing to do with.

Secondly, if Reagan ran against Clinton, he woudl lose. And "reagn is the most popular figture in us history" is an inconsequential opinion. There have been many more popular figures who actually added value to the government - Reagan was nothung but a needed smile during a rough time - since we are all like children looking for a mommy to say everything will be ok - that is what reagan did. As he was doing that, he alienated blue collar workers, police officers and the air traffic controllers.

If Reagan had nothing to do with getting those guys out of Iran..than I guess Bush who was only in office for 8 months has nothing to do/at fault in anyway for 9/11.

Carter already HAD the hostages out of Iran. The slick and slippery GOP made them hold on for a month or so until Reagan was sworn in so it looked like he freed the hostages.
Comparing that time and that situation ot 9-11 is not only like apples and oranges, but shows you have no class either.

nunya...I find it so amusing that you divide this into a them and us category..are you that stupid to think that one party is so much better or righetous than the other? Are you so willing to belive everything that is shoved down your throat? Do you honestly believe that someone like Kerry will be able to stop the machine that is already turning?

In a sick and twisted way I do hope Kerry is elected President..than you will have to choke like so many others on your own shit-pie. We as voters should not be fighting amongst one another but yet standing up against the Gov't as it stands today. You go on and dilude yourself that the Dem/Libs will make a difference..you keep telling yourself that one party will CHANGE THE WORLD...maybe I'm jaded but dude...it's all fucked and until you can see that...you can tell me I have no class and whatever else spew you want to spit...but buddy you better as Dr. Phil would say, Get REAL.

WHen I look back on 2000, I am bitter. I am upset at how the election was stolen (I refuse to retrace the steps but anyone with common sense can see it). I remember that nigth after Gore conceded and Bush stood there in our faces. I resolved to give the guy a chance. It was time to move on and time to progress the country. I was willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. Now, I sit here in 2004 and I contemplate where we are at. 4 years ago, we were not at war. 4 years ago, less people were unemployed. 4 years ago our economy was in better shape. I could go on and on with ancilary issues, but I think you get my point.
I do not think it is a tough decision to vote for Kerry. The damage BushCo did to this country in 4 years is horrible. But the fear in me of the damage he could do in 4 more years in comparison is nothing short of what I would call the end of this country as we know it.
Do I honestly beleive Kerry and the dems will do wonderful things for this country? Of course not - what political party COULD do it? I chose Kerry though because I beleive he will do less damage and may even start to reverse some of the damage BushCo has done.