Is being a liberal a bad thing in America?

[MissCatholic]

When did being a liberal become a bad thing?

I know that Conservatives spent roughly $1 billion in the 1980s attacking this one word. but why is it still a bad thing today?

Why are liberals in Texas and other red states treated like Jews were in pre-war Nazi Germany.

Why are liberals not proud to say 'im a liberal' why are Conservatives so judgemental because one is a liberal?

[MasterJedi]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

[John Dibble]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

[MissCatholic]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

but thats in the eye of the beholder.

Coulter is a nazi. republicans think shes a conservative.

[John Dibble]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

but thats in the eye of the beholder.

Coulter is a nazi. republicans think shes a conservative.

And exactly what proof do you have that Coulter is a Nazi. You not liking her is not sufficient proof, btw.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

She's not a Nazi, but she has praised Timothy McVeigh and called for the killing of the editorial staff of the New York Times. So I would call her a terrorist supporter.

[TX_1824]

When did being a liberal become a bad thing?

I know that Conservatives spent roughly $1 billion in the 1980s attacking this one word. but why is it still a bad thing today?

Why are liberals in Texas and other red states treated like Jews were in pre-war Nazi Germany.

Why are liberals not proud to say 'im a liberal' why are Conservatives so judgemental because one is a liberal?

You should probably not compare supposed treatment of liberals in "red states" to that of the Jews in Nazi Germany. What a very poor comparison. Discredits any argument you may present.

[phk]

It depends on where to be honest, supposedly, John Kerry who was branded as the most liberal Senator was able to achieve a 48% pV.

[PBrunsel]

Liberalism is not a bad thing, "New Liberalism" is.

[Virginian87]

Liberalism is not a bad thing, "New Liberalism" is.

Exactly.  The Democratic Party's biggest mistake was in accomodating members of the counterculture of the 1960s.  The legacy of the extremes of 1960s liberalism --political correctness, affirmative action, tolerance of "alternative lifestyles", excessive gun control, and worst of all, a perception of being weak on issues of national security-- has pretty much made the term liberal a bad word in many areas.  In these places, liberals have come to be seen as atheists or hippies with no morals.   

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Liberalism is not a bad thing, "New Liberalism" is.

Exactly.  The Democratic Party's biggest mistake was in accomodating members of the counterculture of the 1960s.  The legacy of the extremes of 1960s liberalism --political correctness, affirmative action, tolerance of "alternative lifestyles", excessive gun control, and worst of all, a perception of being weak on issues of national security-- has pretty much made the term liberal a bad word in many areas.  In these places, liberals have come to be seen as atheists or hippies with no morals.   

People against the Iraq war have far more morals than those for it.

[Democratic Hawk]

Whether one's a liberal, a libertarian, a populist or a conservative is pretty much fine as long as they aren't going about it in a fruit or nut fashion

I'm pretty receptive to moderates of all four colors

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Liberalism is not a bad thing, "New Liberalism" is.

On balance, I think I prefer New Liberalism to Neo-Liberalism in an economic sense anyway but I agree with what Frodo says about the legacy of the 1960s counter-culture movement

I agree with Al, when he once described 1968 as the year when lunatics took over the asylum and haven't the Democratic Party paid for it, especially when it comes to presidential elections. 3 out of 10 is not good

But to here some on the left talk, you'd think all was well. I really one day must visit the White House and look favourably on the portraits of President's McGovern et al. and what they did for the middle class and hard working famlies

Dave

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Liberalism is not a bad thing, "New Liberalism" is.

On balance, I think I prefer New Liberalism to Neo-Liberalism in an economic sense anyway but I agree with what Frodo says about the legacy of the 1960s counter-culture movement

I agree with Al, when he once described 1968 as the year when lunatics took over the asylum and haven't the Democratic Party paid for it, especially when it comes to presidential elections. 3 out of 10 is not good

But to here some on the left talk, you'd think all was well. I really one day must visit the White House and look favourably on the portraits of President's McGovern et al. and what they did for the middle class and hard working famlies

Dave

Bad mistake to compare the liberals of 2006 to some protestors of 1968.

[Jake]

Without question, and I like the Holocaust reference Nomo. We should probably gas you.

[Democratic Hawk]

Bad mistake to compare the liberals of 2006 to some protestors of 1968.

BTW, I voted no. Mainstream liberalism is not a bad thing in itself (neither is mainstream conservatism) but the Michael Moore's and the Cindy al-Sheehani's do mainstream liberals no favors

In fact, I have much affection for liberals, FDR, Harry S Truman, Hubert Humphrey, Henry 'Scoop' Jackson to same but some

Dave

[Speed of Sound]

uuuummm....it would be a bit contradictory for me to say yes, so no.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bad mistake to compare the liberals of 2006 to some protestors of 1968.

BTW, I voted no. Mainstream liberalism is not a bad thing in itself (neither is mainstream conservatism) but the Michael Moore's and the Cindy al-Sheehani's do mainstream liberals no favors

In fact, I have much affection for liberals, FDR, Harry S Truman, Hubert Humphrey, Henry 'Scoop' Jackson to same but some

Dave

What about modern non-warmonger liberals?
Also, Cindy Sheehan is a bad example. Michael Moore is over-demonized.

[J. J.]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

Bingo!!!

[Democratic Hawk]

No but being at the far looney left (and right for that matter) is.

Yep

I've got to admit that fruits and nuts make me choke

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

What about modern non-warmonger liberals?

An interventionist foreign policy is every bit as compatible with liberalism as it is with neo-conservatism. Liberalism in itself by definition is a liberating ideology. Liberals should be at the vanguard of spreading democratic ideals to the oppressed and actively persuing an end to tyranny be it by diplomacy or military action

It hacks me right off - as it does my American kin - that the Democratic Party in abandoning its Trumanite defense policy - rather spinelessly -  allowed the GOP to pick up the defense and national security mantra and lo-and-behold we had Republican presidents realising Democratic presidents visions

I hope one day the Democratic Party will reclaim its 'natural' territory and do a better job of it . It could very well help them at the ballot box. Folk might be unhappy about Iraq but it don't mean that Republicans are on their way out. For those in 2004, who deemed that Iraq was their big issue broke overwhelmingly for Kerry anyway; yet for those concerned with national security voted overwhelmingly for Bush

As well as being credible on defense, Democrats need to neutralise the electoral saliency of social issues too because the GOP has manipulated those to a fine art at the ballot box. In the meantime, the little guy continues to get shafted

Dave

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What about modern non-warmonger liberals?

An interventionist foreign policy is every bit as compatible with liberalism as it is with neo-conservatism. Liberalism in itself by definition is a liberating ideology. Liberals should be at the vanguard of spreading democratic ideals to the oppressed and actively persuing an end to tyranny be it by diplomacy or military action

It hacks me right off - as it does my American kin - that the Democratic Party in abandoning its Trumanite defense policy - rather spinelessly -  allowed the GOP to pick up the defense and national security mantra and lo-and-behold we had Republican presidents realising Democratic presidents visions

I hope one day the Democratic Party will reclaim its 'natural' territory and do a better job of it . It could very well help them at the ballot box. Folk might be unhappy about Iraq but it don't mean that Republicans are on their way out. For those in 2004, who deemed that Iraq was their big issue broke overwhelmingly for Kerry anyway; yet for those concerned with national security voted overwhelmingly for Bush

As well as being credible on defense, Democrats need to neutralise the electoral saliency of social issues too because the GOP has manipulated those to a fine art at the ballot box. In the meantime, the little guy continues to get shafted

Dave

I'm sorry, I don't support warmongers. Iraq was no mistake, it was intentional. I'll make it clear, liberals like me don't support isolationism, but it's a heck of a lot better than our current foreign policy.

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm sorry, I don't support warmongers. Iraq was no mistake, it was intentional. I'll make it clear, liberals like me don't support isolationism, but it's a heck of a lot better than our current foreign policy.

Realism is probably closest to my own view, even if my rhetoric is somewhat neo-con. Nevertheless, liberalism is compatible with interventionism. That's the gist of my argument

Dave

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Why are liberals in Texas and other red states treated like Jews were in pre-war Nazi Germany.

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ABOUT? Do you live in Texas? Were you a Jew in pre-war Nazi Germany? What a stupid comment, liberals here have guts because of the opposition they face, they are very well educated as a whole, and fight a losing battle like the devil. They are treated like everyone else, if they have common sense and control then they are respected, as they shold be, anyone out of line from either side are the ones who are cast aside, stop talking out of your ass.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm sorry, I don't support warmongers. Iraq was no mistake, it was intentional. I'll make it clear, liberals like me don't support isolationism, but it's a heck of a lot better than our current foreign policy.

Realism is probably closest to my own view, even if my rhetoric is somewhat neo-con. Nevertheless, liberalism is compatible with interventionism. That's the gist of my argument

Dave

If interventionism means World War II or humanitarian missions, yes. If inerventionism means Iraq, hell no.