"Oh, he's liberal,” he said. “He's liberal. Let me tell you something. There's nothing liberal about wanting to reduce money in politics that is common sense. There's nothing liberal about wanting to make sure [our soldiers] are treated properly when they come home. There's nothing liberal about wanting to make sure that everybody has healthcare, but we are spending more on healthcare in this country than any other advanced country. We got more uninsured. There's nothing liberal about saying that doesn't make sense, and we should do something smarter with our health care system. Don't let them run that okie doke on you!"

Begging your pardon, Barack, but there is something liberal about all of these things.

These are liberal policies, liberal goals.

It's a crying shame that one of the contenders for the Democratic nomination (and, at this point at least, the likely nominee) feels as if he must deny the word liberal - even as he advances liberal policies!

As Obama goes on with his 'nothing liberal' rant - "Who, me? Liberal? No way! Uh-uh - not me!", the Republicans are falling all over themselves trying to 'out-conservative' each other. To them, 'conservative' is a badge of honor; in fact, if you don't embrace conservatism, you're not even worthy of consideration. As I've said before, the worst epithet one Republican can hurl at another is 'liberal'. Crazy-ass John McCain has been called that by his detractors.

He should be so fortunate.

What has this wonderful conservatism brought us over the last forty years? A black hole of war and war profiteering that is sucking our nation dry as it kills millions? An economy that has taken money from the poorest to give to the richest and decimated a once-thriving middle class? A social climate of bigotry and division, where discrimination is not just morally acceptable, but divinely ordained? A place where the 'Golden Rule' is "He who has the gold makes the rules"? Where we kill others to force 'freedoms' upon them while eviscerating our own freedoms at home? It has turned a once-respected country into the most feared and reviled country in the world, run by lawless thugs who have no aspirations beyond their own enrichment and power.

Some legacy. How proud they must be.

The Sixties brought the Republican party to a place of crisis. The defeat of Goldwater, the civil rights movement, the explosion of social and cultural upheaval – riots, assassinations, hippies, feminists - all these left conservatives floundering like a fish out of water. Scornfully branded ‘the Establishment’, their traditional way of life had gotten away from them, and they were determined to get it back. Capitalism itself was under attack. Everything that was wrong with the world, it seemed, could be directly attributed to liberalism. It was time for serious measures.

In 1968, a group of conservative millionaires and corporate heavyweights convened to discuss this alarming state of affairs. There had been a seismic cultural shift, and conservatives were on the wrong side of it. Lewis H. Lapham, editor emeritus of Harper's Magazine, tells the story:

The hope of their salvation found its voice in a 5,000-word manifesto written by Lewis Powell, a Richmond corporation lawyer, and circulated in August 1971 by the United States Chamber of Commerce under the heading Confidential Memorandum; Attack on the American Free Enterprise System. Soon to be appointed to the Supreme Court, lawyer Powell was a man well-known and much respected by the country's business community; within the legal profession he was regarded as a prophet. His heavy word of warning fell upon the legions of reaction with the force of Holy Scripture: "Survival of what we call the free enterprise system," he said, "lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations."

The venture capital for the task at hand was provided by a small sewing circle of rich philanthropists—Richard Mellon Scaife in Pittsburgh, Lynde and Harry Bradley in Milwaukee, John Olin in New York City, the Smith Richardson family in North Carolina, Joseph Coors in Denver, David and Charles Koch in Wichita—who entertained visions of an America restored to the safety of its mythological past—small towns like those seen in prints by Currier and Ives, cheerful factory workers whistling while they worked, politicians as wise as Abraham Lincoln and as brave as Teddy Roosevelt, benevolent millionaires presenting Christmas turkeys to deserving elevator operators, the sins of the flesh deported to Mexico or France. Suspicious of any fact that they hadn't known before the age of six, the wealthy saviors of the Republic also possessed large reserves of paranoia, and if the world was going rapidly to rot (as any fool could plainly see) the fault was to be found in everything and anything tainted with a stamp of liberal origin—the news media and the universities, income taxes, Warren Beatty, transfer payments to the undeserving poor, restraints of trade, Jane Fonda, low interest rates, civil liberties for unappreciative minorities, movies made in Poland, public schools.*

*The various philanthropic foundations under the control of the six families possess assets estimated in 2001 at $1.7 billion. Harry Bradley was an early and enthusiastic member of the John Birch Society; Koch Industries in the winter of 2000 agreed to pay $30 million (the largest civil fine ever imposed on a private American company under any federal environmental law) to settle claims related to 300 oil spills from its pipelines in six states.

Although small in comparison with the sums distributed by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, the money was ideologically sound, and it was put to work leveraging additional contributions (from corporations as well as from other like-minded foundations), acquiring radio stations, newspapers, and journals of opinion, bankrolling intellectual sweatshops for the making of political and socioeconomic theory. Joseph Coors established The Heritage Foundation with an initial gift of $250,000 in 1973, the sum augmented over the next few years with $900,000 from Richard Scaife; the American Enterprise Institute was revived and fortified in the late seventies with $6 million from the Howard Pew Freedom Trust; the Cato Institute was set up by the Koch family in 1977 with a gift of $500,000. If in 1971 the friends of American free enterprise could turn for comfort to no more than seven not very competent sources of inspiration, by the end of the decade they could look to eight additional installations committed to "joint effort" and "united action." The senior officers of the Fortune 500 companies meanwhile organized the Business Roundtable, providing it by 1979 with a rich endowment for the hiring of resident scholars loyal in their opposition to the tax and antitrust laws.

And so the conservative movement began its climb up from the abyss. They knew that it would take many years and billions of dollars to build their machine. They put into place an interlocking series of organizations designed to produce a new generation of scholars, pundits, and intellectual leaders, supported by think tanks, scholarships, internships, and media outlets. Promising young college Republicans were nurtured and cultivated, and the path to prominence made smooth as they were escorted to high-profile jobs to establish them as leading lights and deep thinkers. The overriding idea was to denigrate liberalism in every way possible – the ‘liberal media’, liberal education, liberal values. This was not a natural ‘swing of the pendulum’ – it was bought and paid for. It was slow-growing, but inexorable, and soon the term ‘liberal’, which only a few years before was how most people described themselves; which stood for society’s values – a safety net for the poorest, tolerance, intelligence, inquiry, progress – became an epithet. Liberals were irresponsible, unrealistic, immature, decadent, and wasteful of other people’s money. They were immoral, licentious, hedonistic, irrational and self-indulgent. With the concerted efforts of the new think tanks, newspaper and magazine articles, and pundits-for-hire, these ideas seeped into the national consciousness.

Forty years later, it is time to understand that the assault against liberalism did not just happen. It was planned, financed, and implemented, and we are living with the results today. This is what happens when unregulated capitalism is allowed to rampage without the checks and balances that liberal policies foster.

Conservatives have spent billions and billions of dollars to make 'liberal' into a dirty word, and they have succeeded when people who should be calling themselves liberal emphatically deny the word in the same breath as they espouse liberal policies and values. Even the word 'progressive', which is nothing to be ashamed of, and represents the idea that society should be improved upon through action, is used by liberals who want to express their values without using the 'L' word.

I think this has to stop.

I've done it myself - I have called myself both liberal and progressive interchangeably, and I feel that both terms express my value system. However, when I choose not to use the word 'liberal', I am making sure that the conservative movement's money has been well-spent. If I back off of the word 'liberal', they win!

I don't know about you, but I am ready to take back that word. Wouldn't it be great if all that conservative smear money was wasted? We need to get back to what liberalism really means.Yes, we made mistakes as liberals (notice I'm not saying 'mistakes were made'?) but instead of scrapping the policies that brought us back from the Depression and gave us a middle class, we should learn from our mistakes and work towards making our great country the best it can be. We can't let fear of being called 'liberal' stop us from claiming our great legacy. Conservatives will revile us no matter what we do, and abandoning our values and moving towards theirs is not the correct response. It only makes them more arrogant, and we validate their position if we pander to them in the name of bipartisanship and compromise. You sure won't see them reaching across the aisle in the spirit of moving forward. As we saw just last week over the FISA issue, if they don't get their way, they simply walk out.

Senator Obama, there is something liberal about wanting to reduce money in politics that is common sense. There is something liberal about wanting to make sure our soldiers are treated properly when they come home. There is something liberal about wanting to make sure that everybody has healthcare, but we are spending more on healthcare in this country than any other advanced country. And the sooner that some candidate has the sack to stand up and say that proudly, the sooner we'll start down the path of getting our country back.

Being called a liberal is 'okie-doke' with me, Senator.

Say it loud: I'm liberal and I'm proud!
_______

About author

Alicia Morgan is a blues musician and progressive blogger who writes at Last Left Turn Before Hooterville.

She has written a book about the dangers of conservatism called "The Price of Right", published by Sterling and Ross. It is available for pre-order on Amazon and other online book outlets, and will be in stores May of 08.
Vote Result
++++++++++
Score: 10.0, Votes: 8
Bookmark/Search this post with:
delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | google | yahoo | technorati
Alicia Morgan's blog | login or register to post comments | email this blog | 546 reads
Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Always have, always will

I haven't stopped saying it since I started in the '60's.

In fact, if I hear some asshole right-winger bitch about Ted Kennedy I always reply, "Yeah, he's way too conservative for my tastes."

The looks I get are priceless.
Submitted by woodguy on March 1, 2008 - 4:45pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
;}

Liberate, liberty, liberal--what's not to like?
_______

I bear no sick words junk words love words forgive words from Jesus
I have not come to explain or tidy up... -- William S. Burroughs
Submitted by Buddhamonkeydevil on March 1, 2008 - 6:09pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
John F. Kennedy gave a

John F. Kennedy gave a priceless definition of liberalism back in 1960. I hope I can give you the correct link:
A Liberal Definition by JFK
Acceptance Speech of New York Liberal Party Nomination
September 14, 1960

http://www.liberalparty.org/JFKLPAcceptance.html
Submitted by Sonomawoman on March 1, 2008 - 6:16pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
I Feel Good

But not for long.

The article makes excellent points, but here in dumbass-sheepland, the word liberal has been poisoned. Obama should NOT own up to the word. If he does, millions of idiots who might otherwise vote for him will be reflexively forced to vote for IcSane.

Let's not kid ourselves. The post I made immediately prior to this explains that far too many Americans have been manipulated into despising liberalism. This has been easily accomplished because we as a people no longer think--we simply react to labels.

It would be possible to spend hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of decades to convince the voters that the word molester is a-ok. If the BIG LIE is on TV and the radio, and repeated over and over and over again, it becomes the truth.

Rehabilitating the word liberal will take years of indoctrination. I don't want to say education, because we stopped learning a long time ago.
Submitted by MarryMeYouForeigner on March 1, 2008 - 6:42pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
Liberals

I totally agree and will add this liberal myth: "Liberals are weak on defense." WWI Woodrow Wilson (D), WWII FDR (D), Korea Truman (D), Vietnam Kennedy/Johnson (D), Gulf War I Democratic Congress. Seems to me that if a political party is in power for all but one major conflict over the last one hundred years, weak on defense is the LAST thing they are.
Submitted by gjgil82 on March 1, 2008 - 8:10pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
We know what we are,

and there is no need to defend, explain or justify! It is a state of mind, a state of being. The label itself is insignificant, superfluous. Am I a liberal? You bet your sweet ass I am, but I don't flaunt it. I speak with a civil tongue and attempt to persuade with reason, not slogans or empty rhetoric. My major success to date is my very own beloved brother - a conservative to the core who recently admitted that he regrets backing Bush twice. As a resident of the scarlet state of North Dakota, he told me today that he is backing Barack Obama. I am proud of his awakening.
_______

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

George Santayana
Submitted by K-CR on March 1, 2008 - 11:33pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
Liberal Republicans

It's been a long time, but many of the policies listed in the article by Mr Lapham were actually put in place by Republican Presidents, usually in concert with Republican-controlled Congresses.

Examples:

Income tax--first imposed by Abe Lincoln, revived during the Taft administration.

Anti-trust laws--came to fruition during Teddy Roosevelt's administration. TR was also the first President to try to implement an old age/disability pension and universal health insurance.

Public schools--US Grant was key to the effort to establish universal public K-12 education. Probably the only real justification for putting the image of this corrupt drunk on the $50 bill (forget Appomattox).

Several of the other items mentioned were heavily Republican influenced.

Me, I'm a financial consultant, so almost all of my colleagues and many of my clients are rabidly conservative/libertarian. I used to tread lightly around the "liberal" label, and tried to avoid political talk with these folks at all costs. As I got older, I finally said "screw it!", and started being open about my affiliations and views. And y'know something? It hasn't hurt my business at all. The only clients I've lost this way were complete assholes that I didn't like advising anyway.

After the total disaster of the last 7+ years, "liberal" is something to be downright proud of. Too bad that today's Republicans can't embrace at least part of their party's liberal heritage.

I'd vote for TR in a minute. He was definitely more liberal than any of our current candidates.
_______

"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate."

--Steven Wright--
Submitted by JMadison on March 1, 2008 - 7:44pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
John Kerry did his part....

....to help poison the word liberal. Or, should I say, exalt the word conservative.

I recall his answer to the question, during the campaign in 2004, "Are you a liberal?" It was his chance, and we all know what he should have said. Instead he began nattering about how, when it comes to fiscal policy, he's a "conservative." And I thought Jesus H. Fucking Christ do we have to cede the language of fiscal responsibility to the repigs? Is it really necessary for DEMOCRATS, the only ones who can claim to have balanced any budget anywhere in my lifetime, to give conservatism credit for that? Fucking imbecile!

I cannot support a party that so willingly participates in its own demonization and, ultimately, demise.
Submitted by cclxxxz on March 1, 2008 - 8:02pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
I AM MORE THAN PROUD...MAKE

I AM MORE THAN PROUD...MAKE THAT MORE THAN DAMNED PROUD...TO BE A LIBERAL.
Submitted by edsg25 on March 1, 2008 - 8:21pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
It's Called Rhetoric

Did you study any kind of rhetoric in school?

In the quoted speech Barack Obama was using a rhetorical device. By saying his values are not liberal values he is implying that he is not just the representative of a single end of the American political spectrum but an American who holds universal values held by the majority of mainstream Americans. He is attempting to unify all Americans here in an attempt to build a broad spectrum of support, after all he is running for President of the United States of America, not President of the So-Called Liberals of America.
Submitted by CarlosBulosan on March 1, 2008 - 8:30pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
Whenever I'm asked, my response has been...

For years whenever 'my friends' ask me - or more appropriately, challenged me - 'what are you, some kinda liberal?', I take a moment to put the question back on them. I say, 'Well let me see...fact is I'm not sure I know just what a Liberal is...and I'm quite certain you don't know. What I will say is that if being 180 degrees away from the thinking and beliefs of a George Bush, or Dick Cheney, or Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, or - well, you get the point - means that I'm a Liberal, then you're goddamn right I'm a Liberal...and come to think of it, if you, my friend, do agree with those SOBs then I'm truly concerned about what you are.'

Assuming we don't come to blows, more often than not it doesn't leave them with much left to say - cause they don't really agree with them either.
Submitted by DirtyDawg on March 1, 2008 - 8:46pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
And furthermore...

,,,the point that I meant to make was that Obama, or whoever, when making these points should recognize that people don't really know what being a Liberal really is, so we have to spell it out for them. For example, 'If wanting to reduce the money in politics is Liberal - and it is - then I'm a Liberal...if wanting to see that our troops are treated well is Liberal - and it is - then that makes me a Liberal too...you get it.
Submitted by DirtyDawg on March 1, 2008 - 8:52pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
Obama has bowed to the right wing language police.

The think tanks have won. Now they're going after the word "progressive." I heard them talking on Fox News about the communist progressives of the thirties. As we speak think tanks are working on the word "populist."

I know a few right wingers. They all think "liberal" means a libertine who wants big government and more taxes and that conservative means godly, pure, patriotic and self-reliant.

We need a candidate who will fight back--who will speak out about the right wing's redefinition of words that mean "in favor of the working man." Let him ask how conservatives would like it if they were defined as anti-middle class sheep-like worshipers of the ruling class.
Submitted by AlreadyRaptured on March 1, 2008 - 11:02pm.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment
Liberals and Progressives

Taking responsibility for changing our language is a challenging problem for all progressives. This is the responsibility of each of us.

I think of "Liberal" as a characterization of free societies. As such it is a quality closely wedded to the core ideas of this country. Liberal means being open and tolerant of new ideas and of people different from yourself. It means making judgments based upon rational thinking rather than the views of some external authority. It is the opposite of fundamentalist. Liberal means being open to evolution and positive change.

Consequently the only effective and enlightening education is a liberal education. The only fair and balanced media would be a liberal media. The only truly democratic government would be one dominated by liberals.

"Liberal" is not the opposite of "conservative." Conservatism is a political ideology manufactured specifically to serve the interests of a power elite. A "Liberal" ideology has no such constituency. It is not claimed by any group but serves all in an egalitarian manner.

That is one reason "liberals" are so threatening to conservatives.

Personally, I prefer to use the word "progressive" to apply to a political movement or ideology. I see "liberal" as having more of a broad meaning that cuts across political lines.
Submitted by Sawyer on March 2, 2008 - 12:25am.
» login or register to post comments | email this comment