marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Go back and read Post #11. I contributed to the "it's a rare opportunity to demonstrate the inadequacy of their position by comparison." Yes, I dumped on liberals then too.
I find it ironic that liberals prefer to be called progressive and not liberal, why is that?
Focusing on my use of the term liberal, incidentally, detracts from the point (whatever the point happens to be). I, being distracted by responding to your chastisements, is detracting from the point also.
I get it, you don't like me using liberal. I ain't gunna stop using liberal. I have demonstrated this time and again. Your move Sir.
I get that. But your misuse of the term "liberal" continuously detracts from the point, to no less a degree than does my focusing on it. Not to mention it's insulting to the numerous classical liberals on the forum.
Finally, neo-leftists don't prefer "progressive" because "liberal" is the uber-insult you seem to think it is ("progressive" is far worse, anyway). They prefer it because they know damn well that their agenda isn't "liberal". They know this because their obsessive hate of "neo-liberal economics" leaves no doubt that their economic policies are not liberal.
(Not to defend "neo-liberal economics", by which they really mean Reaganomics, which is Keynesian tax-and-spend economics disguised by the rhetoric of Austrian economics.)
Last edited: