I keep wondering why people write letters to the editor of their newspapers complaining that they are "ultra-liberal" and unfair to whom or whatever are their own choices. If they don't like the newspaper they're reading, why don't they subscribe to one more to their liking? Personally, I don't mind if the paper I read is "liberal". I find that word much more comforting than "conservative." What's so bad about "liberal"? For example, if your sister or mother or wife or father, etc. is icing a newly baked cake, I prefer saying, "Be a little liberal with the chocolate, if you don't mind." It sounds a lot better for the success of the cake rather than asking the icer to be "conservative" with the chocolate--don't you think? Another example: If you're a teacher and a student hands in a commendable essay, it would not be inappropriate if you are somewhat more liberal with your praise than you are conservative--don't you think? Also, as a parent, perhaps you could be a little more liberal with the keys to the car should your teenage son or daughter is in need of it. It seems to me then, that "liberal" should not be such a pejorative term as some conservatives make it out to be. Even the pledge of allegiance ends with "...one nation, indivisible, with liberal and justice for all"--don't you think?
I'm satisfied that Barack Obama is a liberal president elect who is a graduate of Columbia College, and thus any alumni should be happy and proud of that. I am--although not an alumni of the college, I'm still an alumni of Columbia University. In 1947, most students who went to the College were high school graduates, and WWII veterans, under the GI Bill, went to the School of General Studies--and if they wanted to teach, took their masters at Columbia Teachers' College. The curriculum at the School of General Studies was much more liberal and flexible than that of the College. I had a great education there. My good friend and colleague, Phil Bergovoy graduated from the College--but I don't think he is of the "liberal" persuasion. However, no one is more liberal with his friendship and loyalty than he is to me.
By the way, the dictionary defines "liberal" as "generous, bountiful, not narrow in opinion or judgment." That's good enough for me.
8 comments:
Sun Sentinel worthy
I feel your hinting that Phil the Burg o' Voi is conservative is too liberal. He has quite a revolutionary streak, which is rather liberal, don't you think? And is it a conservative move for an Irishman to marry a senuous, avant garde nice Jewish girl? I have a notion that le Roi d'Guttenburg does not think in terms of conservative/liberal, but rather ponders "what stand can cause the most commotion, which in turn will keep my mind sharp when I'm forced to defend, parry, and counter-attack?" En garde.
I think the terms "liberal" and "conservative", have been used to the point that they are toxic terms to either side. Since i "lean" to the right on most things, I am more "conservative" than "liberal". However, I support gay rights and abortion rights, so i have some liberal points of view too.
I hope Pres. Elect Obama, governs from the center, and gets some of the partisonship out of government.
I used to be liberal. That was when it meant "tolerant of views differing from one's own; broadminded." That's what Webster says. But how is it liberal when groups storm churches whose members legally vote to express their point of view when it differs from theirs? It seems to me the rhetoric and behavior from the left is anything but tolerant. In fact, only libertarian Ron Paul seems to practice tolerance in his approach. It's too bad the most honesty and truth seems to come from Ron Paul whose ideas are probably unworkable in this imperfect world. While the pathetic public bickers with idealogy, our politicians on both sides of the isle have put our entire future in jeopardy. If we had any brains and a little courage we would simply vote every congress person and every senator who has been serving out until we get people who are willing to actually do their jobs of protecting the rights and futures of America's citizens. Happy Thanksgiving.
Robin said...
"Sun Sentinel worthy"
Actually NEW YORK TIMES worthy. However, in the not so distant past, in a galaxy far away, there lived a doctor whose specialty was healing the English language and those who misused its logic.
This revered doctor would have pointed out that "politically" liberal is not necessarily "personally" liberal, and that both terms are frequently misused.
For example, on the Columbia campus, the political liberals are not only anti-Israel but also anti-semitic. That's the latest fad in "higher" education.
Puck was right. Sadly, most of us will be taken in by sound bites, slogans, and advertising.
To PB and BF, the Red Baron requests that you do not get your bowels in an uproar over the innocuous blog "Liberality." If you read it carefully there is nothing political about icing a cake liberally, or being liberal with praise of a student. And certainly nothing about "storming a church" or about Columbia anti-semites. Baron was not writing about extremism of either persuasion,nor about the crazies in Islam. There are conservative crazies and liberal crazies and independent crazies. The blog "Liberality" was written as humorous as I could make it, and was hardly extreme enough to get anyone's dither up. "Liberal" is a word in the dictionary and that was Baron's theme, not a political gang. Get a life.
Your suggestion to some of your most ardent commentators to "get a life" has gotten my dither up. At least I think it's my dither. I'm not exactly sure where my dither is located, but I do know that I am uncomfortable when I sit.
Ah, to be a liberal, now that spring is here. Awake and sing!
Post a Comment