[Eva]

No, I think that the term liberal needs to be redefined as leftist. I don't think that there are many "liberals" in the pure sense of the word in the Democrat party. That's the only problem that I see with Ann's book. I think that there are the "progressive" (socialist/fascist) Democrats and the old fashioned working class Democrats who don't really understand politics. Other than that I think that the book was pretty much right on.

My grandfather was one of those accused of being a communist. He was accused by the Democrats though, not the Republicans. He was a Democrat New Jersey Assemblyman for Camden County who didn't follow party line. His opponent in the primary accused him of being a communist. They must have already been following him because the only evidence that they came up with was that he was seen perusing the headlines on a communist newspaper at a news stand. He not only lost the primary, but they ruined his life. The FBI followed him everywhere, questioned his church members, his neighbors and his fellow employees at RCA where he was the top tool and die maker and held a top security clearance. He was president of the union and made all the parts for the first color tv. He was also a good Christian man, not at all the type to go for communism. The FBI even attended his funeral in 1954.

[marron]

I think that the term liberal needs to be redefined as leftist.

I agree with you. I find it offensive to continue using the word "liberal" as it is commonly used, as the modern left is the very opposite of liberal. The correct term would be socialist, or leftist as you suggest, I even accept their usage of "progressive" although that too is a misnomer. I have begun to use the term "populist" as an alternative.

But I do everything I can to avoid using the word "liberal" in reference to these people. In my other post in this thread, I felt forced to use the word because Coulter does; even at that I felt obliged to place it in "quotes".