proud to be called liberal

When did being called liberal become such a bad thing?  According to dictionary.com, liberal (adj.) is defined as “favorable to progress or reform”, “favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties”, “free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant”, and “characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.”  Those all seem pretty awesome to me, and by these definitions, I would be honored to be called a liberal.  However, I can certainly see how Republicans would demonize liberalism as it is defined above, since all of those definitions are in stark contrast to what they stand for.  And I mean what they really stand for and not just what they say they stand for... because those are often very different.

Let’s break it down:  

• I would interpret “favorable to progress” as willing to learn from my mistakes.  Since Republicans are the party of American exceptionalism, they are unwilling to admit that they are even capable of making mistakes…so there is nothing to learn from, now is there?  We are exceptional because we are infallible.  And in the rare event that Republicans are forced to address actual facts and acknowledge that things are not perfect, they rely on the divide-and-conquer strategy.  By establishing an us and a them, they can simply blame all problems on them.  This allows us to absolve ourselves of any responsibility, and isn't that just easier? 
• Republicans claim to be the party of individual freedoms, but their actions say otherwise.  If they were so concerned with individual freedoms, why would they be so concerned with women's bodies?  I suppose in theory they would be "in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties", but that is only after they get to change the laws to protect the civil liberties for those who they deem worthy.  Namely, rich white men and fetuses.  Once that fetus becomes a baby, however, it can pretty much go fuck itself...unless it is born as a white man into a rich family of course.
• Do I even need to explain why they are not "free from prejudice or bigotry" or in any way "tolerant”?  Just in case you aren't swayed by polls that show Mitt Romney has the support of a whopping 0% of African Americans, consider the words of Republican poster boy Sen. Lindsey Graham.  "The demographics race we’re losing badly,” he laments. “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”  Wow.  This accidental moment of honesty shows just how "tolerant" and "free from prejudice and bigotry" his party is...not at all!! 
• It is the manipulation of last point in particular that has allowed Republicans to successfully demonize being "liberal."  In their political terms, being charitable is equivalent to an unjust redistribution of wealth where the evil government can't wait to take away what hard workers have earned just to hand it all over to a bunch of undeserving moochers.  For a large number of people who buy into this idea - although not all - the dividing line between hard-working and mooching is clearly drawn by race.  Regardless of which arbitrary indicator a person uses to measure worthiness, the measuring occurs within a definite us-v.-them framework where the believer is always part of the us, of course. Republicans have been extraordinarily successful in convincing people that the liberals (aka Democrats) certainly are characterized by a "willingness to give in large amounts”, so long as those large amounts are collected from us hard workers then handed out to them - the lazy liberals who are too busy hugging trees and killing babies to actually work for themselves.  Because of course, any redistribution to try to actually provide the equality of opportunity that we so proudly claim as American occurs in such a dramatic fashion.
  

What is particularly baffling to be is how the Republican party has been able to simultaneously sell the ideas that they are the God-fearing party (the Christian version of God, anyway) and that greed is good.  Of course, Republicans won't actually admit that "greed is good" is the true basis for their platform, but it's not hard to see once you're willing to open your eyes.  On what premise other than greed can the Republicans justify their attempts to thwart the EPA and the FDA from protecting public health and safety in the name of corporate profits, or their insistence on cutting taxes for the rich and corporations at the expense of everyone else under the guise of "job creation", or their willingness to let the country as a whole fail under Obama (aka the black guy) just for political gain??  I'm no Bible expert, but I am fairly certain those two ideas are diametrically opposed.  It is my understanding that charity and helping those less fortunate are kind of a big deal in said God's eyes.  It is also my understanding that God is the only one who gets to judge other people (something to the effect of "judge not, lest ye be judged", right?), so how do these so-called Christians get away with judging who is better and therefore entitled to earthly treasures?  Isn't the dogged pursuit of those riches also frowned upon??  

I really don't understand how generally good people can subscribe to such obvious bullshit...  I mean, you know it's not all that black-and-white (racially or otherwise), right?  Do federal programs need to be revamped?  Of course.  Should they be abolished?  Ummm..fuckin NO!!  Even just the perception of these programs are telling.  If you're a Republican, they're "entitlement" programs, and if you're a Democrat, they are "assistance" programs.  Can't we combine the two without a firestorm??  Can't all people be entitled to at least some assistance when necessary?  Rich people, huge corporations, and banks too big to fail do not need assistance.  And if a person is genuinely in need of assistance, they aren't entitled to an endless free ride.  That just seems logical to me.

As usual in this country, it all comes down to money.  Despite claiming to possess three of the four qualities that define a "liberal", Republicans have managed to manipulate the public perception of what it means to be liberal upon the basis that the redistribution of money is a grotesque violation of human rights.  That's just ridiculous.  At least I think it's ridiculous, but there are obviously a lot of people who don't.  And that is something I just can't wrap my brain around.  If you can give me more insight, I welcome it.  Because I can't understand this mentality on my own.