Obama should look to Franklin D. Roosevelt, not Abraham Lincoln

I'll be honest, I took this from Thom Hartman's blog http://campaign.constantcontact.com

In his Madison Square Garden Speech on October 31, 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt showed the spirit that President Obama needs today. Obama is facing the results of a Republican depression like Roosevelt, not a revolution like Lincoln.

"We have not come this far without a struggle and I assure you we cannot go further without a struggle.

"For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent.

"For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.

"We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace - business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

"They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me and I welcome their hatred.

"I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it the forces of selfishness and of lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master."

"A Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican" By Thom Hartman

My cousin in Livermore, CA sent this one to me. I'd read it before, Thomas Harman is a very good writer and incredibly smart.

This piece came to mind recently when so many people at the town halls have been saying how they don't want big government meddling with their health care- but in the same breath say that we'd better not touch their Medicare.

Do people not realize how ironic they're being when they say stuff like that?

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should loose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, "We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have".

In the interest of self-disclosure; Where I’m coming from and why you wouldn’t think so

The Apostle Paul once made an impassioned declaration of his credentials as a Jew to Jewish members of the new sect that followed “the Way,” (aka Jesus). He described in detail his lineage and pedigree, down to the denomination (Pharisee) to the point than no one could dispute his authority in matters of Jewish laws and traditions.

Much of my adult life I’ve felt like I had to defend my credentials as a conservative. By that I mean as a traditional, straight-laced, straight-shooting, hard-working, family-loving, small-town, middle class, Midwestern white guy. People tend to question my middle-America, middle-of-the-road, stable, straight-arrowness because I vote like a bleeding-heart and I wear that bleeding-heart on my sleeve.

I came from a very stable home in the very sterile suburbs of 1970’s Phoenix Arizona. My parents moved there in before I was born. I’d like to think that it wasn’t a case of “white-flight,” my older brother suffered with asthma and allergies and my parents suffered from family infighting and unrest, but they did leave the Detroit area in 1968. 1969 may have been known as the summer of love, but 1968 was a year of race riots, anti war demonstrations and political assassinations. “Out West,” and the sun belt seemed like the New Frontier that JFK had promised back in 1960.

I choose to believe that my parents were more concerned with our safety than with property values or integration because they taught us to be tolerant of and kind toward people of all colors and creeds. Once upon a time “tolerance” was considered a value rather than a vice.

My childhood was textbook example of stability and normalcy. My parents never divorced and to our knowledge never faced any challenges of infidelity. My Dad had a good paying, union job with an airline. He used to say that part of the year we were middle-middle class, and part of the year we were lower-middle class. I’m not sure if that depended on over-time, holiday bonuses, or tax refunds, but we always had food on the table and clothes on out backs, even if we never had a brand new vehicle or as many of the newest toys that little boys drooled over in the Sears-Robuck Christmas Wish Book catalog.

Surely I was the product and chief beneficiary of the American Dream.
My Mother was a stay-at-home mom most of the time. Some years she took secretarial or temp jobs, I suppose to help pay for home improvements, vacations or to put my brother and through parochial school. While she demonstrated for us that women were as smart and capable and worthy of respect as men, she never burned her bras or pontificated about the need to be “liberated” or to have her own career or identity apart from my Dad. If anything, she often preached to us about how the husband was to be the head of the household and the wife should defer to her husband and honor him- much to her consternation whenever he disappointed her or disagreed with her, which was plenty.

We lived in the same three bedroom, two bath ranch on the same suburban street in the same suburban subdivision my entire life. Mom and Dad still live there. I believe Dad’s got his 30 year mortgage paid off as a matter of fact, which may be why Mom wants to get a condo in a small town on California’s central coast where she can paint all day with her friends.
They scrimped and saved and sacrificed to send us to Christian school from kindergarten through eighth grade. They took us to Sunday school and church every week and made sure we studied catechism and were confirmed. They had nightly devotions with us at the dinner table (not just during Advent and Lent, either) and prayed for us every night. I ask you, what could be more conservative?

In my mind, I adhered to an Arthurian mythos. I aspired to be God’s knight, abiding by the credos of “right makes might” and “by serving each other, we become free.” What could be more conservative?

For my part, I read, marked and inwardly digested as much of God’s word as I could, not to mention church doctrine and Reformation history. In high school, while it seemed like everyone else was studying Bud Light and wine coolers, I was exploring journalism and foreign policy. While other kids were listening to Megadeath and Metallica, I was absorbing Theloneous Monk and George Shearing. I shunned piercings and tattoos. Even with temperatures in the 100s most of the year, I believed it was unmanly to not wear socks and unclassy to wear an undershirt. I was square before Hewly Lewis sang that it was hip to be so. How conservative can you get?
I was about as rigid and repressed as a teenager can get. I can honestly say that I’ve never even tried pot once, even though it was offered to me. I dated some girls but held onto a chivalrous, romantic ideal so tightly that I could never settle for less than the deepest, truest love. Just as well, I spent three of high school’s four years in love with a girl I held on a pedestal. Even so, I valued a relationship with her more than any mere attraction to her, so we remained platonic. Best friends. I was her blood-brother, her confessor, counselor, protector and defender (at least in my mind). For me, women were to be respected, treasured, and treated as intelligent, capable, individuals- not as objectified body parts or recreational play things. Surely that’s conservative, right?

Just like I can genuinely boast that I’ve never tried drugs, I can honestly say that I’ve only had one sexual partner my entire life, which is my wife of 18 years. Again, I ask you, have you ever known ANYONE so conservative?

I contend that even my initial interest in politics was what I would consider conservative- fiscally conservative anyway. My perception of Reaganomics was that it was irresponsible. Skyrocketing deficits and mounting national debt were what incensed me. Boring, huh? Wonkish. My heroes were so called “Blue-Dog” democrats like Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts and Paul Simon of Illinois. I followed my Arizona Senators, Barry Goldwater and John McCain and appreciated that neither of them felt obliged to tow the party line on every issue. I’m telling you, I may have been a charter member of my high school’s Young Democrats club, but as Democrats go- conservative.

As I studied history, I observed that with the exception of Teddy Roosevelt, the Democratic party of the 20th century tended to be on the side of the working class, and more often than not, in my opinion, the side of right. Corrupt Republicans hamstrung or dismantled Roosevelt’s progressive reforms after he left office. Republicans pulled us out of the League of Nations, abdicating the world leadership we accumulated by winning WWI. Republicans favored the robber-barons and led us into the great Depression. Republicans brought us McCarthyism, the red scare and black lists. After LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, racist Southern fundamentalist Democrats flocked to the Republican party and opposed civil rights, desegregation, economic justice and women’s rights under the mantra of states rights and libertarianism. Nixon, a Republican escalated our involvement in Vietnam- including with secret bombings and intrusions into Laos and Cambodia even though he had promised Vietnamization and peace with honor. And everyone knows now that Watergate was a matter of his stealing the presidential election and tried to cover it up. Reagan’s campaign secretly negotiated with Iranian revolutionaries to prevent them from releasing American hostages until after they were sure that Jimmy Carter lost the election and in spite of the fact that Reagan swore that America does not negotiate with terrorists, his administration sold Iran missiles (through Israel, of all brokers) and used the proceeds to fund the Contra Rebels in Nicaragua in direct violation of laws passed by Congress. Now, sure, these reasons are partisan, but surely my reasons for mistrusting the GOP are reasonable, if not reasonably “conservative.”

One summer, I applied to work at the phone banks for the state Democratic party. I supported the blue collar, Midwestern candidate, Dick Gebhart. I’m ashamed to say that one of the reasons I found a different job was that I just wasn’t comfortable with how many of the men who worked there shaved their legs and how few of the women who worked there didn’t. Than may make me bigoted, a hypocrite, or a homophobe- but I believe it also made be quite conservative.

I attended a Lutheran Church~Missouri Synod college, Concordia in small town in Nebraska. A small, church run teacher’s college with fewer than 2,000 students, established in the 1890s with a small professor to student ratio where I was discipled directly by old, white, male Ph.D.s and Th.D.s and Rev.s for five years. Again, I absorbed a culture of reserved, humility, piety and servanthood. My mentors ingrained in me a healthy skepticism of secular humanism and new age nonsense. I virtually minored in Religion, meaning I took the classes required for a Lutheran Teacher’s Diploma, qualifying me to become a Commissioned Minister of the Gospel, that is a Called teacher at a Lutheran school trusted to teach Religion or Bible classes. Well versed in denominational history, official church teachings and Synodical doctrinal positions. Again, I ask you, what could POSSIBLY be more “conservative?” For decades I struggled and wrestled in my soul about whether God was calling me to pastoral ministry. Decidedly, un "liberal."

So what makes me a liberal? Maybe it’s because I believe in Teddy Roosevelt’s promise to give EVERY American a “Square Deal.” Maybe because, (even though he was also an honorary Grand Wizard of the KKK) Wilson’s 14 points of open treaties openly arrived upon and self-determination for emerging nations was egalitarian and responsible. Maybe it’s because FDR’s New Deal ushered in the longest era of economic expansion and prosperity for the middle class in history. Maybe it’s because I think that great thinkers like Henry Wallace, Elenor Roosevelt, Adali Stevensen, and Eugene McCarthy were visionary in their perspectives on race, class, economy, and foreign policy. These aren’t radicals, these aren’t Marxists, these are people who loved America and believed in the dignity of every human being.

Maybe I’m a “liberal” because I buy into the optimism of potential and public service espoused by JFK. Maybe I’m a liberal because I admire the courage and sacrifice of men like Martin Luther King and John Lewis. Who risked life and livelihood to hold America accountable to her promises. Maybe it’s because even though an overdeveloped and misguided paranoia about Communism led him to mire us in a tragic mess in Vietnam, LBJ still brought us the Civil Rights Act and had hoped to battle a noble, if ill fated war on poverty. Maybe it’s because Robert Kennedy spoke of renewing our cities, our environment, and our faith in government as a tool for the common good. Maybe it’s because in spite of is short comings, I appreciated that Bill Clinton paid-as-he-went (fiscally conservative), that however short lived it was, he eliminated the deficit and was reducing the national debt. I find it amazing and ironic that the number of abortions was lower under Carter and Clinton than under Reagan or either Bush. And no president has ever demonstrated Christian service, or dedicated himself to the study and teaching of God’s Word than James Earl Carter. Conservative. Preserving democracy, protecting the little guy, protecting the Constitution and our precious traditions. Conservative.

And yes, call me hopeful or too easily inspired by soaring rhetoric- but I have to tell you, so far, I am enthusiastic about the bottom-up grass roots movement, the savvy use of the internet, the cabinet of rivals, the transparency, accountability, civility, attempts at consensus building, the consummate professionalism, tireless work ethic, and gritty pragmatism of Barrack Obama. All these attributes seem bone-deep conservative to me.

So I don’t like xenophobic demagogues bullying people on their AM talk radio shows and their “info-tainment” shows on Fox News. So I think that you don’t have to be straight, so long as you can shoot straight to enlist in the Army. So I think that the 14th Amendment entitles everyone to equal rights, even if they’re gay. So I believe in protecting women from back alley clinics and coat-hanger abortions enough to want abortion to be legal and safe, even though I find it heinous that so many people think if it so callously and nonchalantly as just another form of birth control. So I can’t get passed the part about a “well-regulated militia” whenever I read the 2nd Amendment. So I see the anti-establishment clause of the 1st Amendment’s wall to separate church and state ass something that protects and benefits Christianity, and government. So I actually support a progressive tax structure because I feel like with much privilege ought to come much responsibility AND because I believe that demand-side economics is far more sustainable than supply-side.

If these things make me “Liberal.” Than label me Liberal. If they make me “Progressive,” label me Progressive. If they make me “Socialist,” then I must be guilty as charged.

But please, don’t begin to think that I somehow don’t love my country, my community, my family, or my students. Please don’t fear for my salvation or question my relationship with or loyalty to Jesus, because I beg Him to renew my baptism and drown my sinful nature and make me His instrument every morning. Don't say that I'm not smart and for Heaven’s sake don’t assume that I’m a conformist or that I prefer not to think because I have followed the crowd and value few things as much as reading and learning.

I strive to help people see and come to a better understanding of both sides of every issue. That does not make me less moral or less aware, or for that matter, less conservative than anyone.
Please refrain from impugning my patriotism. If you detest and are repelled by the things I stand for or the way I vote, let’s either try to find what we do agree on or simply agree to disagree.

And if you don’t like what I write- don’t read it. If you’re offended or annoyed by what I post on the internet, don’t revisit my blog or why not write your own? You may even delete me as a friend or block me on facebook- I’ll never know. But please, please don’t pretend that because we disagree, that somehow means that I’m bad or less valuable or your enemy. And if you do, just remember, Christ told us to love our enemies.


St. Paul used his credibility as a hard core Jew to oppose those Jewish Christians who were telling people that they had to be circumcised to become a Christian. I think that what I've tried to lay out her is that if anyone deserves to be able to call themselves a conservative, it's me- yet I choose to be called a liberal democrat because I believe that with a few (in Republican opinions glaring) exceptions, I believe that most liberal political values are more in line with my Christian religious convictions.

I didn't even mention George W. Bush or Iraq or torture. I could probably write another whole page just on how radical, rather than conservative I believe "neo-conservatives" are. And you don't want to know how strict and conservative my parenting style is.

10 Myths conservatives believe about progressives

"For the record: Liberals love America. In fact, what makes us liberals is that we actually read and believed all those pretty words in the Declaration of Independence about "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and in the Bill of Rights about freedom of speech, religion, assembly, privacy, and all the rest of it.

We're idealists that way. We want to live in the country the Founders described. We believe that the nation's founding documents expressed a uniquely powerful moral contract between the people and their government, and an audaciously positive vision of people's ability and competence to shape their own future. When we get annoying and whiny, it's usually because we believe so much in America's astonishing promise—and our own responsibility for realizing it—that we're sorely disappointed when the country falls short of that standard. We really want to believe we can do better.

Conservatism, by contrast, tends to take a dim view of human nature, prefers hierarchy to liberty, and isn't completely convinced people can or should be trying to contravene the will of God or their betters by trying to arrange their own futures. This tends to lead to a selective reading of the Constitution (as well as the Bible), and—as we've seen in the Bush years—a far more flexible attitude toward its interpretation..."

"It's going to be a stranger season than most, in no small part because the changing political winds are going to put some fresh twists and turns into the same old holiday discussions. But holiday arguments over religion and politics are a tradition that's as old as the republic. For most of us, wouldn't be an American family holiday without a little hot conversation served up over a freshly roasted bird."

Oddly enough, while some of my Republican relatives are still leery of Obama, they seem pretty unanimous in the view that Bush has been a colossal nimrod. But these 10 myths are certainly alive and well in Western Iowa where I live. Myth #11 is that we hate Western Iowa because it's so staunchly Republican- and I love it here so much, I can't imagine living anywhere else. It's one of the things I'm most thankful for today. What's hard about it is that most of the right wingers who live here honestly swallow these 10 myths hook, line and sinker!

Maybe I'd still have a weekly column in the local paper if fewer people weren't so painfully prejudiced against us "Lefties."

If you're a lifelong, dyed in the wool Republican, please give this article a read and maybe you won't be so offended by me all the time.

Moderates, Independents and Democrats- (Blue Dog and Yellow) read this, print off a copy, study it and do your best to educate and enlighten our friends and family in the "Red" parallel universe, perhaps someday we can heal the tensions that have been straining America so severely for the last decade and a half or so.

Read the whole article at http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008114825/talking-turkey-ten-myths-conservative-believe-about-progressives

Conservatives vs. Progressives

Not long ago , this Schultz character who's a Republican candidate for our state legislature (District 55) got my Irish up. He's a fellow Lutheran, but he opens every campaign pitch with a Evangelical Religious Right wing diatribe about gay marriage, abortion and teaching evolution and prayer in public schools, while getting government off our backs, out of the social welfare business, stop giving health care to illegal aliens etc. etc.

After a few weeks time to cool off and reflect, it occurs to me that we're both right (and wrong) but also both as sincere as can be. He thinks that it's up to churches and charities to help the poor and disaster victims- not the government, whereas I think it's up to the churches and parents to teach about God pleasing personal and moral choices and to encourage and model prayer- not the government.

However you feel about it, whether you think that government is a means to reform society in preparation of the second coming, like Conservative Evangelicals (Restorationists & Calvanists), or whether you think that government is an instrument for achieving social justice or continuing Jesus' ministry to the poor, the sick, the widows and the aliens, like the Liberation-Theology (AME & Liberal Catholics) you have to admit that the convergence of faith and politics can be very sticky.

You also have to admit that Americans don't know the meanings of our own words. But then, so much of language is semantics.

I thought what follows was a fascinating discussion:

"The labels are somewhat oxymoronic if not paradoxical.

Progressives, for example, like to conserve nature, and historical buildings.

Conservatives like to put up new and more modern buildings after demolishing the old.

Conservatives mostly want to retain historical morals and ways of being: against stem-cell research, and abortion, and gay marriage, and want to retain the Judeo-Christian heritage based on the Ten Commandments.

Progressives want to retain historical cultures, and want the Native Americans to remain Native Americans, and want African tribes to remain tribal, and want each culture to retain its originality, even to the point of not being quite able to stand for women's rights in places like Afghanistan.

Conservatives (like Reagan) wanted to mainstream American Indians, bringing them up to date with the latest developments. Bush wants to mainstream Muslim countries, pushing them into the Democratic 21st century, where dictators disappear, and voting appears, and women have universal rights.

I'm sure there are many other ways in which the two terms aren't exactly adequate to what the supposedly rival groups claim to actually want.

And of course the two great streams have lots of crosscurrents within them.

But every time I hear the terms I giggle to myself at how inadequate they are.

Conservatives actually want progress on certain fronts: they want universal human rights based on Lockean Christianity, and they want to build an aggressive economic sphere that looks to the future.

Progressives actually are quite conservative on certain fronts: they want to retain each culture's wisdom, based on a Unitarian belief that Diversity of ideas is a good thing, and must be retained, and they want to retain the look of the 19th century even in the midst of our business spheres so that some kind of link to our history remains."

Posted by Kirby Olson on http://lutheransurrealism.blogspot.com

Like the American middle-class way of life? Thank a Liberal.

A Day in the Life of Joe Conservative

by Anonymous

Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance -- now Joe gets it, too.

He prepares his morning breakfast: bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment checks because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the taxpayer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved conservatives have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

Moral: Want to be able to live like a Republican? Vote like a Democrat.

Why even Republicans could be proud to be called 'Liberal'

Special thanks to "John L." of someplace our West for this week's cartoon idea- I'd be more specific, but the NSA and CIA are probably already listening to his phone calls.

If you see things from Dubbya's perspective, you'd also like 'New American Century,' and of course 'Mein Kampf.' Well, no actually you probably prefer burning books to reading them. In hind sight, I think I should've had 'W' say "heckuva game plan." He doesn't use words as big as "ingenious."

If on the other hand, you take the donkey's view, then may I also suggest 'It can't happen here,' by Sinclair Lewis and 'Fahrenheit 451' by Ray Bradbury (not to be confused with 'Fahrenheit 911' by Michael Moore).

And now, 'Ted's Column' for the Thursday, October 25, 2007 Mapleton PRESS

Main Entry: lib·er·al·ism

Pronunciation: \ˈli-b(ə-)rə-ˌli-zəm\

Function: noun

Date: 1819

1: the quality or state of being liberal2 aoften capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties dcapitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party

— lib·er·al·ist \-b(ə-)rə-list\ noun or adjective

— lib·er·al·is·tic \ˌli-b(ə-)rə-ˈlis-tik\ adjective

We had this one History professor in college that everyone seemed to revere. He was tall, gray, had a deep, warm timbered voice with a mild Missouri just barely Southern but more Midwestern accent, and a bone dry sense of humor.

Professor Grothaus was the head of the History department at Concordia College and a dead ringer for William H. Seward, namesake of the Nebraska town where Concordia was located. Seward, of course was Lincoln’s Secretary of State.

Students found Doctor Grothaus to be an enigma. History is a discipline that is forced to address politics and parties, controversies and competing interests. Grothaus never betrayed his personal convictions.

Grothaus had a mystical aura that transcended petty, mortal things like opinions, ideologies or political issues. He seemed to be omniscient. God like in his knowledge of anything anyone ever asked him about history, society, or the government of the United States. He was constantly and relentlessly recommending books and journal articles by historians and scientists to his devout students.

Someone once asked him how he managed to read so much, truly believing it wasn’t humanly possible. The rest of us were aghast at the impudence of such a question, as if Dr. Grothaus were mere human.

The professor replied matter-of-factly, “One finds time.”

One day, someone worked up the nerve to peek through the aura. They asked him point blank, “are you a Liberal or a Conservative?”

In characteristic wry and typically oblique delivery he answered, “Liberal, in the eighteenth century sense of the word.” Which of course left the class of 18-20 year olds no more enlightened than before. The aura remained.

18-20 year olds aren’t as bright as they like to think they are.

All it would’ve take is a glance at an old fashioned Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary to read “associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives.” Wow, that sounds like a pretty GOOD thing to be, especially in the United States.

I know many a Republican who believes in encouraging citizens to participate, especially by voting and plenty of them who seek to reform government. Heck, “economic freedom” is one of their favorite mantras. Who’s more Liberal? Republicans or Democrats? How did George H. W. Bush manage to turn it into “the L-word” and make it seem so dirty back in the 1988 Presidential campaign?

Since then, many have taken to calling themselves “Progressive,” so as not to be stigmatized. A progressive is “one believing in moderate political change and especially social improvement by governmental action.” Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower, famous Republican Presidents were both progressives.

Last week I had some Seniors in my Web Design class asking for help on a Government assignment. Many of the questions dealt with the two major parties and sought to help students differentiate the major philosophical tenets of each. I have to admit, even during such polarized times as now, it was a bit like trying to separate tar from molasses in a mud pit.

A “Conservative,” according to Daniel Webster’s dictionary is someone “tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions… marked by moderation or caution.”

When you think about it, Ronald Reagan overturned a hundred years of sound economic theory, reversed a progressive tax structure that helped promote and maintain a robust middle class, and dismantled what had been an industrial and egalitarian society and replaced it with a consumer-based one that shamelessly benefited a new kind of aristocracy. Not very moderate, not very cautious.

Then we come to “Neo-Conservative.” What the heck does that mean anyway? Webster’s doesn’t help much.

First it says “a former liberal espousing political conservatism.” Lots of Democrats today hold up Barry “Mr. Conservative” Goldwater as a model of character, integrity, and public service. Guys like John Edwards and Barrack Obama have been talking an awful lot about God, family, rights and values. Are these guys “Neo-Conservatives?”

Another definition is “a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy.” I’m all for that. Let’s promote free elections in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Dubai, and China and Russia for that matter. The problem is the second half of the definition- “advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means.”

Ouch, see, “democracy” is a system where the citizens have choice and decision. You can’t coerce someone to be free (AKA; to have liberty and democracy) with military force. Asserting national interests through military means, is not conservative, moderate, or traditional at all. It’s aggressive, radical, un-democratic.