Obama calls on Fox News, mourns beard

Anyone else notice how the word 'liberal' has gradually been replaced by 'progressive'?

Anyone else notice how the word 'liberal' has gradually been replaced by 'progressive'?

Posted by: Terry | December 3, 2008 2:27 PM

Anyone notice how "conservative" isn't?

What's your point Terry?

That probably happened, Terry, because we were sick of people like you starting every sentence with "You liberals."

As if millions of people were one monolithic entity that all talked, walked and acted the same.

Us progressive types can recognize individuals and individual beliefs. Why, some of my best friends are conservatives = )

Liberals by nature like innovation. That's part of what makes them liberal. So changing to "progressive" is just another step in that direction.

Anyone else notice that conservatism isn't working?

Yes, I've noticed the liberal-progressive slide, too. Which sets conservatives up to be-what? regressives? anti progress?

The term "progressive" isn't new at all, just resurrected. It was first used around the turn of the 20th century, and was most famously used to describe the policies of Gov. LaFollette of Wisconsin. Some of us see it as a good alternative now that some of our friends across the aisle can't say the word "liberal" without a sneer. In general, progressive politics involve a belief that government-run institutions work best when controlled by voters and not special interests, and must be run by experts in the field of science (both natural and social), economics and law in order to be efficient and to provide moral . In other words, the antithesis of modern conservatism. Lets start a pool for how long it takes Mr. Limbaugh to find a way to turn it into a derogatory term.

Why shouldn't they be called progressives. They believe in progress toward a fairer society, toward a sustainable economy, toward peace. Conservatives think those things are already taken care of.

I want the beard back!!!

Progressing towards socialism. Wait is that regressing?

Democrats are not necessarily progressive - for example Blue Dog Dems. Progressives are not necessarily liberal or Democratic.

I just love the way the (ahem) conservatives keep trying to whip up a lather over the word socialism when they themselves have foisted the largest most expensive bit of socialism in US history.

I don't think the (ahem) fiscal conservatives have an accurate understanding of what the word implies or more likely, they are willfully denying they actually are benefiting from socialized services i.e. police, fire etc. etc. daily.

Let's keep in mind that we have had 8 years of non stop corporate socialism under the Bush administration at an enormous expense to our country.

How would you label our current little fiscal debacle?

Conservative, Liberal? Progressive? Socialized?

The word "liberal" is not an insult to those of us who embrace that mode of thought. Only someone who believes in the Newt Gingrich / Rush Limbaugh / Fox News connotation of the word would see something sinister about its interchangeability with the word progressive.

To David@4:19PM,

Under Liberalism, Socialism, Progressivism, etc., how is it fair that people are made poor? Look at the inner cities. These areas have been under total liberal control for four decades and they are an utter mess. Everyone is mostly poor and kept mostly poor by Liberal policies. This is not fair. Keeping people from being successful is not fair.

The other liberal word usually used is "justice". How is there justice when we are all supposed to tolerate bad behavior? Again, look at the inner cities.

Liberalism brings the OPPOSITE of fairness and justice.

And the word "equality" really implies that we are all supposed to sacrifice success so we can all be "equal" - equally poor.

Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism, etc. - whatever you want to call it - is TERRIBLE. People suffer under Liberalism.

We should all fight Liberalism and fight for Freedom and individual responsibility.

By definition, conservatives will not acknowledge progressive benefits because they've already absorbed them and no longer realize they were progressive ideas at the time.

Look at history: every major advance we now take for granted
- end of slavery
- women's right to vote
- antidiscrimination laws
- social security (broadly speaking - let's not hang up on details)
- public health movement of the 1900's
- public education
- banking regulation

were opposed by conservatives 'at the time'. that doesn't mean they are opposed by today's conservatives, but at the time the conservative view was against the progressive view. So conservatives have been on the wrong side of history on every major issue. By accepting progressive benefits, and then 'taking them for granted', it's easy to criticize liberal/progressive views on today's latest topic (gay marriage, anyone?) and forget the discussion around past topics (interracial marriage, anyone?).

So progressives have been winning the long war of ideas, and that's good for America. But since today's conservatives accept their core beliefs of equality and public benefit as a given, they don't acknowledge the progressive struggle that brought about these improvements.

Therefore, by definition, conservatives don't acknowledge the correctness of progressive/liberal views because they've already adopted most of history's progressive ideas and no longer count this in the win/loss column.

Alz, once again, another pug that just isn't thinking clearly. First, you really have to walk in one’s shoes to understand. If you suddenly had all of your income vanish, and you had no family network, you would move to the city to find a job. (this is historically proven)Plus, maybe you would even use some of the homeless shelters to get back on your feet. Does rural America have homeless shelters and a plethora of listed jobs? I live in rural America. Most jobs go to someone that knows someone, and few get listed. Everyone knows that it takes more money to live in the country (rural) than in a city.

Another scenario for you to digest. Picture yourself as being born from a homeless black mother in Compton CA. What are your realistic chances of being a millionaire at some point? It’s kind of hard to get an education when those silly things called eating, clothing, and shelter seam to get in the way every minute. You apparently forget about our agrarian ancestry, where growing food was the main objective of the day, thus not allowing much time for anything else. So, this is why poor people live in cities and towns, and the rich live in the country and the suburbs. This is also why the inner city folk tend to vote democratic, rather than republican. The disadvantaged vote for progress, and are not victims of a democratic agenda. Try again.

The word "progressive" has been widely used by socialist/communist regimes. In Cuba it has been used since early since the Castro dictatorship. They even established a radio station called "radio progreso" or "progressive radio" which is basically a megaphone to bash the US and praise the allmighty leader Castro brothers.

I hope he never calls on Fox until they stop acting like tabloid news. Which... will probably be never.

Haves and have nots. That's at the heart of it all and what selfish conservatives constantly, insistently, blindly refuse to acknowledge. Straight, unregulated capitalism is based NOT on the "freedom" (whatever the heck that really means), as right wing talk shows constantly blather about. Capitalism is based on the rich getting richer on the backs of the poor. Hey, conservatives, tell me how you can have wealthier and wealthier people without also having poorer and poorer ones? I'd love to hear someone explain this stuff away. I'd love to hear someone jsut TRY to.