Why on earth would I?

BTW, Al From wrote in his book that he got tired of the DLC, which Bill and Hillary helped found, being called the conservative DLC. So, he deliberately named the Progressive Policy Institute "Progressive," figuring no one would labeling it the conservative Progressive Policy Institute. IOW, he deliberately misused "progressive" so it no longer had meaning.

The lesson we can all learn from From and the rest of the DLC types: labeling yourself or your institution "progressive" does mean you are progressive, nor does it make you progressive. All it means is that you misused the word, and probably intentionally and for a self serving reason.

a republicon trick that we all loathe. Now, a Republicrat trick as well.

To, like, you know, get it in gear?

Cause dog knows nothing else will do it.

Followed immediately by a peck on the check, LOL. I don't even know how to be scary.

eom

I'm a proud Democratic, like dishonest, unethical conflict of interest Matthews knows perfectly well Bernie is.

And it's become less of a dirty word these days

I use to call myself a social pragmatist, which meant that I tolerated behavior from others as long as they didn't interfere with the public safety, welfare and health. Then Hillary started calling herself a pragmatist and I was in search of another term.

Then I began to identify myself as a Liberal, until neo-Liberals began to use the term. Here, it was easier. I just make sure people know them for the neo-liberals they are. Which as far as I am concerned, is not a Liberal at all.

And now, she claims to be a progressive which, as Matthews points out, is a broader term. What does Hillary do? She tries to triangulate the definition so she can have her cake and eat it too.

I'm just saying, it would make it easier for us if she just embraces her neo-liberalist identity instead of trying to move the Webster goal posts.

And, what is a neo-liberal? A Democrat who doesn't believe in regulation of the financial markets and sides with neo-cons seamlessly; Or, one who uses Liberal lingo AND deregulation to accomplish what Republicans can't do by force.

....because she isn't.

She prefers to be called a progressive instead of a liberal because of the negative connotations behind the word liberal. Trying to twist that to mean something other than what she obviously means is completely disingenuous.

Or would you not have even started a thread on the subject?

connotations of the word liberal?

"Liberal."

yeah "progressive" on a few social issues that don't threaten corporate power....and as long as they are poll tested.

Otherwise, they might as well be Republicans.

We have eyes and ears, so why would we?

The DLC and PPI took the sullied idea of liberalism and reinvented the term progressive to replace it in common usage. As they have used it, progressive = centrist = corporatist, but with lip service paid to key left leaning identity groups to occasionally give lip service to their causes ... like choice, gay rights, equal opportunity, social security, etc. That's why we've felt that they only support social issues while letting this country rot from within with our failing antique infrastructure and low income economy.

Of course, we actual liberals in the economic as well as social sense, weren't ever supposed to notice that the Democratic party's power players never meant liberal as we have understood it. At best (for them) by changing the vocabulary, they would make it almost impossible for most of us to adequately express a coherent organizing principle, much less to actually remake society along the principles of fairness and justice. At the same time, the cherished meaning of "liberal" could continue on its path to degradation and extermination... just like its evil twin, the dreaded socialism.

It worked for going on 3 decades, and hasn't yet been defeated.

I have always referred to myself as a Liberal D.The current Progressive D Prez claims he would be to the Right of Raygun if it were the '80s.

Anything to the Right of Raygun is nothing that interests me.

You sure about that?

(Nixon more liberal than him *on some issues*).

Obama said he would be a moderate Republican if this were the '80s.

Is this woman tone deaf or what?

as much importance as anyone should be attaching to her empty words here.

She is not a liberal, no matter what she says or you say, or anyone says. She never will be: there's no money in it, and liberals don't get to boss others around.

to my rich donors. Proles are too poor to matter."

I was at DU when "progressive" came into use as a substitute. I was here. I watched it happen.

So sue me, and sue Hillary too.

Because you're not. You're a neo-conservative.

in a very different way.

again.. can you imagine

She is a right-leaning centrist.