Skip to comments.
Even ascendant Dems wary of 'liberal' label
Politico ^
| 11/12/07
| David P. Kuhn
Posted on 11/12/2007 7:38:21 AM PST by freespirited
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Conservative is identified with a sensibility, Stanford University linguist Geoffrey Nunberg said. If you can't figure out why, you just might be a liberal.
To: freespirited
I prefer the word progressive, A turd by any other name...
2
posted on
11/12/2007 7:40:47 AM PST
by
theDentist
(Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll. "What happens if neutrinos have mass?")
To: freespirited
'Liberal' has taken on a connotation that describes big government." Clinton said,I prefer the word progressive,"Which means really big government!
3
posted on
11/12/2007 7:42:14 AM PST
by
BenLurkin
To: freespirited
Liberal, progressive, socialist, marxist. It all means the same thing to Hillary. She wants your stuff.
4
posted on
11/12/2007 7:42:58 AM PST
by
samtheman
(Fred Thompson '08)
To: freespirited
Liberalism stands for socialism, nannyism, high taxes and government control. And for breakdown of social order, family, faith and traditional values. Americans know what liberals are and that's why there are so few of them.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
5
posted on
11/12/2007 7:45:07 AM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: BenLurkin
Proclaim it loud and proud through every outlet possible:
“Liberalism” cannot compete in the arena of ideas. Every time that it is honestly examined and compared to conservative principals, it will fail.
Even “liberals” understand this. This is why they never are honest about what they want to do if given power. And it is why so few “liberal” policies are implemented through any representative process of government - it’s almost exclusively forced on us by oligarchs in robes who “know better”.
6
posted on
11/12/2007 7:45:51 AM PST
by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: theDentist
“I prefer the word ‘progressive,’”
Towards what is she progressing? Outright socialism?
7
posted on
11/12/2007 7:46:19 AM PST
by
Disturbin
(Giddy Up)
To: freespirited
My definition of progressive, when concerning me, is that as of typing this, I don’t own a firearm. I will own one. Being progressive, I’ll own more than one. Why, I might even own one that could kill a rabbit!
8
posted on
11/12/2007 7:46:41 AM PST
by
wastedyears
(One Marine vs. 550 consultants. Sounds like good odds to me.)
To: freespirited
Just noticed that George Lakoff (rhymes with) was a big contributor to this article.
Yeah, George Lakoff who blatantly trains his SS (secular socialist) squads that they cannot debate “progressivism” in the terms of the real world, but must always “frame” the debate in their own terms (ie, in a world where the sky is pink) in order to argue.
9
posted on
11/12/2007 7:48:18 AM PST
by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: theDentist
Have you seen any of the commercials that are setup to look like the Apple/PC guys, except they are “Con” - conservative, vs. “Pro” - progressive? Spin, spin, spin.
10
posted on
11/12/2007 7:49:11 AM PST
by
Hegemony Cricket
(You can't seriously tell me you think we need more laws, or that we don't already have too many.)
To: Disturbin
It is true that she wants to take your liberty away from you.
But it is for her notion of the “common good”.
To: MrB
Liberals have to lie and hide who they are. They have to do it to remain politically competitive. If they ever began to be honest with the American people about their views, their candidates couldn't be elected dog-catcher. Their success in defining themselves by Republican failure masks their real problem: they cannot be who they really want to be since most Americans are NOT liberals. Period.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
12
posted on
11/12/2007 7:49:50 AM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: freespirited
I believe Hillary recently came out in support of the gas milage achieved by the old Model T Ford (I'm not making this up) and she wants new cars to be just as good as that.
So -- Progressives are the people who want our cars to be just like the cars from 1917.
13
posted on
11/12/2007 7:51:39 AM PST
by
ClearCase_guy
(The broken wall, the burning roof and tower. And Agamemnon dead.)
To: freespirited
“Even ascendant Dems wary of ‘liberal’ label “
Of course.
That’s part of their plan to FAKE their way into possession of The White
House, Senate and House.
By pretending to be sane, resonable human beings until the Wed
after the Nov. 2008 election.
Actually I’m pleased with Hillary calling herself a “progressive”.
Even O’Reilly slams “secular progressives” on his show; hence her
choice of label wasn’t the swiftest move HILLARY! has made.
14
posted on
11/12/2007 7:52:48 AM PST
by
VOA
To: freespirited
Its interesting there are MORE conservatives than Republicans. It says that while the American people don't trust the GOP to be a small government party, they have not turned their backs on conservatism.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
15
posted on
11/12/2007 7:53:37 AM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: VOA
What you’re seeing is that the label always comes to be understood in terms of what it is applied to.
If you called a can of beets “banana peels”, it would soon be understood that “banana peels” refers to beets. One real example I can think of is “mincemeat” (apples).
My way of describing the who “relabeling” of the left is:
A can of brutal, authoritarian communism,
wrapped in a label of democratic socialism,
wrapped in a label of liberalism,
wrapped in a label of progressivism.
Same can of crap, and everyone understands it.
16
posted on
11/12/2007 7:58:44 AM PST
by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: freespirited
Throughout much of the 20th century the term "progressive" was code for a fellow traveler to the communist cause. Because the MSM commands the language they are now trying to convince us that the term is benign. Go back and read papers from the 30's onward and you will see that progressive was a self described term among leftists, when they really meant communist, but weren't willing to publicly describe themselves as such. We should call these people what they really are, communists, just as they were in much of the 20th century.
17
posted on
11/12/2007 8:03:16 AM PST
by
Cacique
(quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
To: freespirited
The self destruction of Republicans has obviated them to come up with the need for more of a party identity. English as a second language.
18
posted on
11/12/2007 8:05:09 AM PST
by
hsalaw
To: freespirited
I prefer the word progressive, she said. It has a real American meaning. Then she expanded the term to modern progressive, and, finally, clarified that she was a modern American progressive.
Progressive = Liberal
Modern Progressive = Liberal
Modern American Progressive = Increasingly tedious liberal
19
posted on
11/12/2007 8:07:19 AM PST
by
kidd
To: freespirited
Progressive. How quaint.
Free love/AIDS/Abortion; The Drug Culture; The Breakdown of the Family; The Establishment of a Permanent Poor; The Marginalizing of Christianity; The first American “loss” of a war...
The people aren’ t “progressive.” They promote “regressive” behavior.
20
posted on
11/12/2007 8:07:51 AM PST
by
rightinthemiddle
(Without the Media, the Left and Islamofacists are Nothing.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson