And came up with four pretty good articles.
When was liberalism’s expiration date?  Hot Air
The City that Liberalism Ruined  National Review Online
Mamet and the wisdom of conservatism  Dallas News
The "L" Word Scares Dem…

Now THAT’S how liberalism works.

“…right-wing politicians used “law and order” as a code for race”

I have heard hear this over and over again, from leftist commentators, but never have seen any actual, well, evidence for it. Is there any, or is this a libel repeated so often it is accepted as true?

superherodad on April 5, 2008 at 12:04 PM

Technically, the term for that is “propaganda.” And, yes, that is exactly how liberalism works.

Just because right-wing politicians used “law and order” as a code for race did not mean that concern about crime was illegitimate.

I have heard hear this over and over again, from leftist commentators, but never have seen any actual, well, evidence for it. Is there any, or is this a libel repeated so often it is accepted as true?

Nixon’s career itself shows no evidence. On the contrary, according to Manchester, Nixon was more foward leaning than Eisenhower (and possibly Kennedy) on civil rights.

But I do enjoy seeing conservatives always trying to define what liberals are and what they stand for. This entire post seemed to be an elongated rant about how conservatives know so much about about the inner-workings of liberals.

Why don’t chime in then? I’m clearly confused and would appreciate the clarification.

Civil rights and voting rights, Medicare and Medicaid, clean air and clean water legislation

Hey, EJ, you liberal crybaby. Weren’t civil and voting rights spearheaded (no pun intended) by republicans? Wasn’t the epa and osha and the first clean air and clean water legislation enacted during Nixon’s administration? Why do liberals think Americans are so stupid they can say anything they want and think we will believe it?

xyan on April 4, 2008 at 9:53 PM

Ugh. I don’t want to get into a lecture on political philosophy but I recommend you read Aristotle and Locke and Hobbes before saying America was “founded on classical liberal principles.” They played a role, but definitely not the only role, and the intents of these and other philosophers aren’t what people like you have distorted them into. Modern day Republicans and Democrats and even liberals and conservatives don’t even begin to focus on the main tenants of Classical Liberalism and Aristotelian Republicanism. Being a conservative may mean defending the Constitution to you because that’s what you want it to mean, but it in no way relates to the Classical Liberalism as defined by Locke, Hobbes, Madison, and Jefferson.

But I do enjoy seeing conservatives always trying to define what liberals are and what they stand for. This entire post seemed to be an elongated rant about how conservatives know so much about about the inner-workings of liberals.

aengus on April 4, 2008 at 2:16 PM

As I see it, America is founded on “classical” liberal principles, i.e. the constitution. So being an American Conservative means defending the constitution, which is the most (classical) liberal constitution and society in the world to date. It’s an inspiration to the world.
Still, what you call “liberal” is quite the opposite.

Now we’re at the point that the conservative beliefs are almost identical with classical liberalism.

Not really. We’re at the point where conservative beliefs have been banished from the public square and classical liberalism is served up as a consolation prize to disenchanted conservatives.

I find the celebration of classical liberalism on HA ridiculous. What about “classic” conservatism? You know, Burke and all that.

That effort still exists on the left. They’ve tried to make “swift boating” a synonym for “treacherous and deceitful attack” when it was clearly Kerry who had lied about his record. They invented the word “homophobe” to impugn anyone who wasn’t politically correct on Gay Rights. They successfully hung “Star Wars” on Missile Defense.
So when they accuse conservatives of using “code words”, I think that could be a classic case of projection.

Always late to the party it seems.

I’ve thought it was high time that “Conservatives” here rescue the term “liberalism.” It has been kidnapped by the radical left for a long time, and then we demonized it. It’s quite a good thing, at least classically. I think the term ought to be resurrected and owned by us.

RUSH, CAN YOU PLEASE ADOPT “LIBERALISM”, AND HELP TO RE-DEFINE IT FOR A NEW GENERATION? ALSO, I’M STILL FREE TO COME OVER ANY TIME. THANKS.

JiangxiDad on April 4, 2008 at 10:23 AM

I’ve come to understand that one is best to describe themselves as a classic liberal when trying to make the distinction. Using it in that way sure does fire up someone who does call themselves a “liberal.”

Yes but what I meant was if theres one modern liberal party and one classical liberal party then where do traditional conservatives fit in?

aengus on April 4, 2008 at 2:16 PM

I am not sure, but traditional conservativism was/is definitely not ‘reactionary.’

The myth that Dionne is propagating (whether cynically or naively) is based on moral narcissism: The desire of liberals to believe that they are morally superior to ordinary people. Support for the liberal agenda — from welfare to gay rights to “peac…

I second that.

It will be reborn in 2009 onder the new label of Progressivism under the New Messiah, Prsident Obama.

Then the Deluge and the End of America (as we know it)…

There are more whites on welfare than blacks.

During the war on crime why was there a focus on “street crime” by the “underclass” rather than white collar crime which has a monetary cost many times that of other crime?

Well, maybe this is just me, but I value human life and health over money. It’s better to be embezzled from than to suffer death or permanent physical and psychological injuries from a violent crime. Also, the primary victims of black “street crime” are, overwhelmingly, other blacks, so it would be racist NOT to crack down on it.

Entelechy on April 4, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Hm I wouldn’t go by grammarians when it comes to loaded political labels. “Progressive” is a Marxist code word. I’m sorry I don’t have any examples to hand.