I notice how anchors on TV swerve to avoid it. The Republicans have so successfully given it a bad name, that one is supposed to tip toe, stutter and blush before we say it.
Liberal.
How did this happen? How, in an equally divided country, did so many Americans become so disenfranchised?
Edward Galeano, Uruguyan poet put it this way in his prose poem "The Culture of Terror".
"Blatant colonialism mutilates you without pretense: it forbids you to talk, it forbids you to act, it forbids you to exist. Invisible colonialism, however, convinces you that serfdom is your destiny and impotence is your nature: it convinces you that it's not possible to speak. not possible to act, not possible to exist."
No longer. We're starting to challenge the naysayers, the righteous right. Last night I watched Howard Dean on Charlie Rose. Dean rode a tsunami of discontent on a Wellstone catch phrase "I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic party". A unapologetic call to arms that resonated with millions of young people, it shifted the course of the campaign. Dean is riding on his new book "You Have the Power".
Dean wants to to reclaim the "l" word. Dean wants to remind the public that "liberal" rhymes with fiscal responsibility. "Bill Clinton was the first president in 33 years to balance the budget".
Bush's frat boy charm wears off quick- even for Republicans- when you point out how happy he is to spend other people's money. His spending exceeds even the previous record holders, Ronald Reagan and George the First. After Clinton left the White House, budget analysts were predicting a 5.6 trillion surplus. Last week, the Congressional Budget Office projected a $3.6 trillion deficit over the next 10 years.
Deceptions that got us into Iraq have been followed by fudged budgets and repeated dippings into the till for special appropriations. Now that they hold the pursestrings, the neocons are reckless spenders. Combined with their anti-tax convictions, it casts a long economic shadow. That's a thorn in the side of the RINO's (Republicans in Name Only), the neocons have alienated, who are also uneasy about faked intelligence, constitutional oversight in the bedroom, interventionist foreign policy.
Fiscal responsibility is a strong image that fits in well with a sense of ethics and principle that the left represents. This is a perfect moment to hammer the righteous right with their no-end-in-sight spending, put to rest the ghost of "tax and spend" for once and for all.
Reclaiming the word "liberal", on the other hand, requires another strategy, in my view. The roots of the word in Old English to the idea of generosity. Webster calls this "open-handed."
Is it possible to be both generous and responsible? To say yes and to say no? Every day, each one of us struggles with that dilemma.
Liberals are inclined to err on the side of generosity to those who are hurt or struggling. At the same time want firm limits set on the powerful.
One of my favorite bits of bumper-sticker poetry is:
"It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber."
What are our core values? What does it mean to be a liberal? I hear over and over that the Democrats have no vision. Those of us on the democratic wing of the democratic party are clear about our vision, and have been for a long time. What we need to do is speak out.