Why Karl Rove can get away with smearing Liberals--in simple terms.

[geek tragedy]

Look around at the various Democratic elected leaders and figures.

Now, imagine them being accused of being a liberal.

Which reaction would you expect from them?

1) "Liberal principles are the expression of hope and progress in this great country. We believe in freedom. We believe in equality. We believe every person in society deserves the opportunity to succeed. We believe in tolerance. We believe in justice. We believe in the rights of workers and the middle class. Those are liberal values, and I'm proud of them!"

2) "Are you talking to me? You addressed liberals, and I don't see any liberals here. You must have me confused with Howard Dean."


This kind of crap wouldn't be possible if LIBERALS, instead of wingnuts, for once talked about what it means to be liberal.

[NorCalDem]

1. I can say it even simpler

He's a douche!

Any questions?

[geek tragedy]

3. That's motivation, not what enables him to act on that motivation. nt

[dbt]

6. Too right!

And the ENABLERS are everywhere in the Ma$$ Media--the overwhelmingly CON$ERVATIVE Ma$$ Media. Rover can get away with this shit because nobody will call him on it!

:grr:

[geek tragedy]

8. But, liberals have fed the perception of liberals being weak by not

fighting back.

[flamin lib]

2. Yep, you got it. We have allowed them to define us.

Once that happened we liberals are on the defensive.

When I announce that I'm a Democrat people from the other side try to label me as a "bleeding heart" at which I bristle, raise my voice just a bit and correct them. I am not a bleeding heart liberal. I am a screaming, flaming angry liberal. Get used to it.

[KnaveRupe]

4. And you know who you can blame?

Mike Dukakis.

When accused in the '88 debate of being a "card-carrying liberal" by Bush Pere, Dukakis should have whipped out his ACLU card and waved it in 41's face. If Dukakis had proudly seized the Liberal tag at that moment, we wouldn't have this problem today.

That's when we let them take "Liberal" and transform it into a dirty word.

[geek tragedy]

5. And a generation of cowardly Dems afterwards.

Now, if someone's from Mississippi or Montana, I can understand not wanting to run as a liberal.

But when you're from somewhere like Massachusetts, say it loud, say it proud.

[Karenina]

7. It's called "demonization"

and even a cursory a study of GERMANY's history and his familiy's INVOLVEMENT in that sordid past will reveal its effects.

[Lexingtonian]

9. Oh, I dunno

The point of the present barrage is not about pushing back liberals, the liberals being attacked are imaginary strawmen. In a sense it's wrong to even respond to the charges. It's like responding to the charge of "Heretic!"- laughing it off and ridiculing it and satirizing it is the right response. Accepting the charge by saying "Yes, but..." is to be stupid.

The real point on the Republican side is to cheer up demoralized hardline Republicans and appeal to the prejudices and uninformedness and occultic adherence (aka noncritical thinking) of moderate Republicans. It's an exercise in rallying the Faithful by exalting the tenets of The Faith in words and gestures. It's all about making the impression of Willpower In Action. Its bit of substance is about wedging Republican leaners away from Democrats.

We should just f-cking ridicule the Republican leaders. That's by far the most effective thing to do.

"Oh, sure we'd give aid and comfort to terrorists and indict them. We'll bring 'em flowers and candy. But we'd actually catch them first, unlike these bumblefucks! And we'll actually obey the Constitution in doing it!"