What do DUers think of Kerry's rejection of "labels"

Since I've come onto DU, shortly after 9/11, there have been many people arguing that Dem politicians should embrace the "liberal" label with pride. Last night, Kerry was presented with several opportunities to do so, and each time Kerry rejected the chance to embrace liberalism, and instead rejected the idea of labels and emphasized his non-liberal side.

I thought it was brilliant, but I suspect there will be some who still long for Kerry to embrace the liberal label. So what do you think?

his answers to wedge issues were extremely good. he appealed to both sides with his answer on abortion especially, where Bush only appealed to right wingnuts.

there really wouldn't be a reason to embrace the liberal label yet. during the campaign isn't the time to do that. once he's elected would be a good time to undo the stigma it carries. while he's campaigning it would only be divisive.

The media would go into whore-mode Dukakis frenzy if Kerry even mentioned the word liberal. Bush might have exploded with joy, and started cranking the attack ads out immedietly.

When President Kerry is in office I hope that a rebirth of the word liberal can come back. But now it's too hard of a battle to fight when we need to win.

he is what he is and lables are stupid when people are so determined to see only in terms of left and right.

(less than 2 weeks ago) On The Issues had Kerry right on the line between moderate and liberal, but on the follow up - he moved well into the liberal range. I have no problem with that ... I just don't understand what may have caused the sudden shift.

http://www.issues2000.org/John_Kerry.htm

The nation is highly polarized. Despite his excellent showings in the debates, there has been only small change in the polls. He knows he can't win over Bush supporters, and Bush knows that he can't win over Kerry supporters. (That's a general statement. There will be a few execptions - but only a few.) So this election will go to the side that can most energize the base.

Bush is doing the same thing.

Kerry is no liberal, he'll say what he has to to get a vote.

As comapred to Dumbass, who will DO anything for a vote.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power"
-Benito Mussolini

it is action that matters. And then he referenced "Compassionate Conservative" and showed how uncompassionate bush really is.

is useless.

A more effective strategy is to stick them with the label "Radical".

if we don't use "liberal," we can rely on the word "progressive." Remember in '64 when Goldwater lost in a landslide, nobody wanted to be called "conservative." What other words for "conservative" are there that don't have a negative connontation? "Radical" and "reactionary" both sound bad. The most neutral I can think of is "traditionalist." but that suggests and aversion to progress.

and if Kerry governs like a republican (or as distasteful, a corporate loving DLCer)I will work just as hard to get rid of him in 2008 as I am working to get him elected now.

BTW, he is doing much better since he found his inner Howard Dean and stopped being so nuanced. Thank God he gave up on the Gentleman's Jujitsu or what the hell ever that was Dem_Strategist was trying to sell us as Kerry' brilliant strategy in August.

... of George (and RW spin doctors) tendency to revert to labels and talking points to define an issue, when in fact things are more complex than 'one word blurbs'.

Makes an inroad for people to actually LOOK at an issue as more than just being either/or .... right/wrong ...

Jumping to conclusions and tossing out 'yer either with us er agin us' judgements is not the sign of a highly developed thinker. And that's the contrast Kerry subtly drew between himself and Bush last night.


:hippie:

I've always been against the whole "labelling thing". As soon as a person whose politics lean toward the right throws the "Liberal" label at you, it effectively allows him/her to dismiss every position of yours out of hand. Most of us here realize that very few people actually reside completely at either side of the spectrum.

political labels are useless. Especially when you're trying to determine to what "degree" of a Democrat a person is.

For the short term of this election, the idea to reject labels was a good move. The task of restoring meaning to the word "liberal" will have to be carried out far beyond the election.

Given that the monkey had just called Kennedy "the most liberal". Monkey Man was so eager to use the "liberal" label that he forgot who the fuck was standing right next to him....

If there is ever going to be peace in this nation labels need to be torn down. All of us have conservative and liberal views whether we acknowledge it or not.

What needs to be focussed on is that we are all Americans, and that we should want what is best for us as a community. The promulgation of labels will not further this aim. In fact, it continues to drive us apart.

and are stuffed with a huge amount of baggage from years worth of RW propoganda. Even among people, like myself, who call themselves liberals, there is a huge range of interpretation as to what that word actually means.

Kerry was right to not fall into letting him be painted into a label with a large number of negative connotations, and no real agreed upon meaning and turn it back around into what his actual policies and stands are.

I really think that it's up to other people besides politicians to rehabilitate the word "liberal".

IMO, if you want to restore credibility to something, the last person you want at the front is a politician. It's really is up to us.

I would have liked him to discuss the real meaning of 'liberalism' in the context of social philosophy (small, unintrusive government, individual rights), and point out the irony that republicans claim to be for these ideals but in reality work against them by increasing government spending and the deficit, by supporting the Patriot Act to thwart civil librties, and so on and so on...
But, no doubt, Kerry would come off as a snooty over-intellectual windbag.
So I think he did the right thing.

I think Kerry did a very good job deflecting Bush’s immature name calling, but I wonder how believable Ronald Reagan would have been had he denied being a conservative. The word “conservative” carried many negative connotations just like “liberal” does today. However politicians like Reagan and intellectuals like Buckley eventually reversed the picture by embracing the term.

Whenever anyone calls me a liberal I always thank them for the compliment and point out how Washington, Franklin and Jefferson were all liberals since they believed in individual rights and limited government, while the conservatives supported King George. I like to tell them how our most liberal president was a Republican who freed the slaves while the conservatives always seem to support some form of human bondage. Of course you can also talk about Teddy Roosevelt and the anti-trust and conservation movements, and carry right through to present day.

Why have we allowed the word liberal to be dragged down to where we are afraid or ashamed to admit who we are?

It is too easy to show his voting record as proof that he is a liberal - using the current defination - not the classical one. So trying to avoid the label can be used against him too. By pointing out the he is avoiding the label implies that he thinks the liberal label is a bad one. He needs to embrace the label, and turn it into a positive.

Bush just kept throwing out this label "Liberal." "He's a liberal. He's the most liberal member of the Senate." Not once, however, did he actually state what that means. Policy, beliefs, votes, anything; the people want something!

Kerry's comeback was excellent. Not only did he reject the whole idea of labels (it was the only time during the whole debate that he referred to Bush by the label "Compassionate Conservative"), but he implicitly said, "Bush has nothing to throw at me but labels. I have no need for labels; I have the facts."

These debates have actually made me happy that Kerry beat Dean; Kerry and Bush are such polar opposites that the differences are especially striking.

threw it back in the simian's face..

"But when Bush denigrated his opponent as a liberal Kerry was ready. “The president is just trying to scare everybody here by throwing labels around. I mean ‘compassionate conservative?’ What does that mean? Cutting 500,000 kids from after school programmes? Cutting 365,000 kids from health care? Running up the biggest deficits in history?“