How should Kerry respond to the liberal label?

[Onlooker]

According to Newsweek, Cheney will begin the assault on Kerry's so-called liberal voting record.

One way for Edwards to deal with it is to point out how both parties have changed over time. He could say that starting over a decade ago, the Democrats under Clinton became more centrist. Then, he could use John Eisenhower's column to show how the Republicans have changed:

"The fact is that today’s 'Republican' Party is one with which I am totally unfamiliar." (The letter is filled with great talking points in this context. See:

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44657)

[RC]

1. Why hedge and apologize?

A liberal voting record is something to be proud of. Liberals by definition care about people and the environment and the well being of the world we live in. Liberal do not start wars on lies for other countries resources or to topple other countries governments.

[molly]

2. So what? * defined himself as compassionate

conservative and he is definitely NOT that!

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Don't allow them to define them.

The conservatives have been redefining the term "liberal" for so long, that it really means "moderate" by today's standards. A liberal back in the 60s meant something entirely different than what it means today.

[Birthmark]

4. Response to Bush?

"What do you mean by 'liberal', Mr. President?" And then watch the drooling begin!

[demnan]

5. I think he should point out

that labels are largely misleading about a person's voting record. I'm sure he could state examples. Frankly, I wish he were more of a liberal, but that's just me.

[dogman]

6. It's time to reclaim the Liberal label!

“As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.”-George Washington

I am a liberal. We live in a liberal democracy.
That's what we created in this country. That's in our Constitution. ... I think we should be very clear on this.  You know, this country was founded on the principals of the Enlightenment. It was the idea that people could talk, reason, have dialogue, discuss the issues. It wasn't founded on the idea that someone would get stuck by a divine inspiration and know everything right from wrong. I mean, people who founded this country had religion, they had strong beliefs, but they believed in reason, in dialogue, in civil discourse. We can't lose that in this country. We've got to get it back.
Wes Clark - September 5, 2003

[BOSSHOG]

7. Embrace with open arms

If liberal means I'm more concerned about the poor families in the Mississippi Delta then the rich guys in the executive suites then I'm a proud liberal.

If liberal means I'm more concerned with medicare and social security stability for American Citizens then no bid contracts for Halliburton then I'm a proud liberal.

If liberal means I want a strong military to defend not only our shores but to help countries threatened by bullies instead of using it to preempitively attack sovereign regimes for my own personal and political gain then I'm a proud liberal.

If liberal means I am for fair taxation for all Americans instead of tax breaks for millionaires then I'm a proud liberal.

If liberals means I am for letting the American People know what their federal government is up to instead of the vast shield of secrecy that george bush and dick cheney have put over their actions for what reason, who knows, then I am a proud liberal.

This stuff just spun off my keyboard but its all true. I'd take the liberal tag and shove it up cheney's ass until he choked. Fuck ignorant freepers and what they are told to think.

I served in the Navy 24 years, I live in Mississippi and I am one proud liberal Democrat.

[Xenus Sister]

12. That was beautiful, thank you!

Made me cry. Liberal is NOT a dirty word.



(Everybody please support "Going Upriver" by going to see it in the theater and/or buying the DVD on amazon. Every voter in America should see it)

[Diana52]

14. Bravo!!

Hear! Hear!

I am soooooo sick of liberal getting a pejorative rap.

It's been about 100 years since I was in grade school, but I do recall that con is a quite often a negative prefix.

[RoyalWickedness]

27. Couldn't have said it better myself

You took the words right out of my mouth! I've never understood how the Repukes have been able to spin "liberal" as a bad thing. Fuck 'em.

[tapper]

8. Throw it back in their face!

Something like ...

My opponent is calling me a 'liberal.' Am I a liberal? Well, I guess it depends on how you define the word.

If being a liberal means thinking that American security is more important than tax breaks for the wealthy 1% ... then call me a liberal!

If being a liberal means thinking that clean water and clean water is more important than letting corporations increase their profits by allowing them to pollute ... then call me a liberal!

If being a liberal means thinking that we should work with our friends and allies, and not sneer and mock them when they disagree with us ... then call me a liberal!


And so on...

[kokomo]

17. I have proudly called myself a liberal for years......My comeback is....

We had all better be proud that our Founding Fathers were all liberals or we would still be singing "God Save the Queen!"

[ET Awful]

9. Just quote Kennedy

But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal

[RafterMan]

10. Once again, attack, don't defend

"I'll put my record up against George Bush's record any day of the week."

Change the battle from "liberal" vs "conservative" to "better" vs "worse". Kerry wins.

[Strawman]

23. Absolutely right

Besides this calling someone a "liberal" thing has lost its magic with the general public. It's nothing to worry about, I think. Stay on the attack. Just because one could easily defend the liberal label, that doesn't make it strategically wise. Make Bush defend things he can't possibly defend by staying focused on his record of failure and his extremism and regularly point out, as Kerry did in the debate how people like John Eisenhower are supporting him.

[Onlooker]

11. I didn't say he should bash liberalism

I agree that he can defend it, but he can't go overboard because the fact is Kerry is supported by many independent conservatives and even some Republicans who like some of Kerry's less-than-liberal promises. If they come to believe that Kerry is a liberal at heart, they might return to the Bush fold.

[DarkPhenyx]

13. Say "Thank You"?

"It's good to see you know I have the right view on things."

[chefgirl]

15. Embrace it

Be PROUD to be a Liberal.

I started doing that a couple years back when it became apparent to me that it was being morphed into some kind of backhanded insult.

So, I made up my mind that whenever my Republican ex-husband (or anyone else) called me a liberal, that I would come back with something like, "You're damned right I am, but more importantly, why AREN'T you?"

Liberal= inclusive
Liberal= tolerant
Liberal= progressive
Liberal= open minded


-chef-

[secular_warrior]

16. Kerry should respond by saying he is a "tough progressive"

(or a "tough liberal"), and then go on to list all the reasons why.

This is what Kerry should've done from the beginning, IMO, so he would've looked stronger and prouder of himself and his party while being able to distinguish himself from the image of the irresponsible, utopian '60s liberal which has been burned into the minds of most Americans by the Republicans over the past 30 years.

[debatepro]

18. Progressive V. Liberal

Correct him and say that Kerry is progressive and bush is conservative. When said together Progressive invokes a innovative and proactive type person. Where as when conservative is juxtaposed to Progressive, the conservative persona appears stationary and reactive. I don't use the word liberal anymore only progressive.

[NinetySix]

19. He should say, "Goddamn right."

Then point out how much closer Liberalism is to true Conservatism than is the so called Neo-Conservative ideology. Liberals and conservatives are republicans (small 'r'), while Neo-Cons are imperialists, first and most importantly. Liberals and conservatives also realize that taxation is not an impediment to civil society, but rather the pavement on which civil society operates; Neo-Cons think the solution to everything is to bring an end to taxation, the result of which will be to leave every person to sink or swim on his own, in essence, leaving the sheep at the mercy of the wolves.

I have never been a fan of Conservatism, because I disagree with its tenets, but I have come more and more to appreciate the role of Conservatism in society since these madmen took power. These days I would welcome the traditional political dichotomy and give-and-take, the responsible counterbalance to Liberalism that true Conservatism offers as opposed to the one-party inclinations of the Neo-Conservative reactionaries.

[RafterMan]

20. Lots of thoughtful posts

but you've been fighting this battle since Bush the Elder. Won it yet?

You're not going to in the next month. Change the topic to "Cheney radicalism" or "Bush failures" or something. The time to start a philosophical debate about the true meaning of liberalism was eight months ago. It didn't happen. Now it's time to get busy stomping on Bush.

This is just more junk they're throwing out to get you off track. Don't fall for it. Bat it aside and press the attack.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. Wear the label with PRIDE!!!!

I'm proud as hell to be a Liberal! He should never back away from it...ever!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

22. Throw everyone for a loop and say

"Yes, I'm liberal, and that's nothing to be ashamed of, and here's why. If you or a relative has Social Security, thank a liberal. If you were able to buy a house with an FHA mortgage, thank a liberal. If you have clean drinking water, thank a liberal. If you're a rural person who has electricity in the house, thank a liberal. If you feel free to apply for any job that you're qualified for, regardless of your race or gender, thank a liberal." Etc. Etc.

[mumon]

24. Really?

Well, "liberal" is a synonym for "progressive," and I'd rather have a "progressive" voting record than a "regressive" one.

Otherwise, I'd ask how are Cheney and Bush going to respond to their cowardly military records?

[Bush was AWOL]

25. I'd say something like this:

"What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal" to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.

In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my political credo:

I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.

I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them.

Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today. For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power, restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And the only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence and responsibility.

Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are descended from that segment of the American population which was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense of national purpose. For many years New York represented the new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the spirit as well.

Tonight we salute Governor and Senator Herbert Lehman as a symbol of that spirit, and as a reminder that the fight for full constitutional rights for all Americans is a fight that must be carried on in 1961.

Many of these same immigrant families produced the pioneers and builders of the American labor movement. They are the men who sweated in our shops, who struggled to create a union, and who were driven by longing for education for their children and for the children's development. They went to night schools; they built their own future, their union's future, and their country's future, brick by brick, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, and now in their children's time, suburb by suburb.

Tonight we salute George Meany as a symbol of that struggle and as a reminder that the fight to eliminate poverty and human exploitation is a fight that goes on in our day. But in 1960 the cause of liberalism cannot content itself with carrying on the fight for human justice and economic liberalism here at home. For here and around the world the fear of war hangs over us every morning and every night. It lies, expressed or silent, in the minds of every American. We cannot banish it by repeating that we are economically first or that we are militarily first, for saying so doesn't make it so. More will be needed than goodwill missions or talking back to Soviet politicians or increasing the tempo of the arms race. More will be needed than good intentions, for we know where that paving leads.

In Winston Churchill's words, "We cannot escape our dangers by recoiling from them. We dare not pretend such dangers do not exist."

And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the underpinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but our image abroad as a friend.

This is an important election -- in many ways as important as any this century -- and I think that the Democratic Party and the Liberal Party here in New York, and those who believe in progress all over the United States, should be associated with us in this great effort. The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United States in their time had it, was because they moved this country here at home, because they stood for something here in the United States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people, and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.

I think it is our task to re-create the same atmosphere in our own time. Our national elections have often proved to be the turning point in the course of our country. I am proposing that 1960 be another turning point in the history of the great Republic.

Some pundits are saying it's 1928 all over again. I say it's 1932 all over again. I say this is the great opportunity that we will have in our time to move our people and this country and the people of the free world beyond the new frontiers of the 1960s."

John F. Kennedy

[9119495]

26. Simple here it is:

"Mr. President, you obviously feel that liberal is a devisive term. Why do you use it? You claim to be a uniter, not a divider, so my political philosophy is irrelevant here. And...could you tell me what exactly is compassionate about your conservatism and how does your sense of compassionate conservatism differ from traditional conservatism?"

[Cheswick2.0]

28. since he is not all that liberal , he should do what Byrd did

accuse the right wing of calling all democrats liberal, list some "liberal" accomplishments that every american depends on such as SS, etc... and then leave it at that.
Or he should just ignore it altogether. Unless someone asks him if he is liberal and he has to answer, he should ignore it.

[louis c]

29. by linking Liberal to pro-Labor record

Use your common sense, if someone has 96% Liberal voting record, and 92% pro-Labor record, wouldn't you say those position coincide?

Fighting for American workers has been labeled as a Liberal agenda in an effort to have Middle America vote against their own interests.

The rise in minimum wage, the extension of unemployment benefits, safety in the work place, equal pay for women, additional health care benefits through the employer, the right to organize, protection of Unions, support of collective bargaining, protection from outsourcing, and much, much more , has been labeled "Liberal".

Kerry should ask the President "Which one of these 'liberal positions' that he is against"?

That's how I answer "Liberal".

[Arkana]

30. He should wear it with pride.

It's about time a candidate wore the badge of a "liberal".

[BootinUp]

31. "Compared to the radical administration"

"I could see why the Vice President thinks that."

Then list a few of Kerry's and Edwards bipartisan positions vs the administrations wanting to cut overtime pay, tax cuts that are weighted to the wealthy and endanger our security, etc.