Reply #22: With all due respect to AW and PAK,

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

by 1994, there was absolutely only a ghost of a 60's liberal tendency left in the Dems. What had taken its place was the constant trumpetings of Rush and wannabes on the AM radio about the evil evil liberals. In other words, their work is relevant if Limbaugh's world of evildoers (aka liberals) really existed.

While there were some excesses in the liberal movement in the 60's (the last era of true liberalism), as there are with most incipient movements, the goals espoused by the larger movement (civil liberties for all) were as necessary and noble as any ever championed in human history.

If you look carefully, there has not been a political leader (other than Gore, really) in the last three decades, that has championed progressive causes. We are constantly debating only regressive measures (how much can we restrict personal freedoms? how much can we impose religion on science and in general? etc) and figuring how far back we need to turn the clock. The most staggering set-back is this Intelligent Design imposition -- echoes of the 15th 16th centuries, for shame.

This is the reason why I like the word progressive better than the word liberal -- progressive captures our ideals better than liberal does and in any case, I think the true opposite of conservative is really progressive. It also captures nicely the constitutional ideal "for a more perfect union" -- progressives want to look for ways to better ourselves and our lives: less war, less violence, more individual liberties and a more egalitarian society, progressively better.

There can really be no middle ground between those who want to overrule science and those who believe in science. There is only one correct position there. Similarly, there is no middle ground between people who want to impose their religion on to the public square and those who do not, etc. It is up to us educate people to get there, not forfeit the ground and retreat to a "middleground" that is really located back in the 16th century, simply because the political landscape is against us temporarily...