I find it interesting how the meaning of such familiar words and concepts as liberty and liberality are being reframed.
For example, the root of both words is from the Latin word for freedom, yet they have apparently become descriptions of two political poles. I say apparently because perception may as well be reality in today's politics, yet i believe it is vital for us to parse how the message becomes the identity, in the sense of how such a meme can supply a sense of belonging, giving a seemingly stable point of reference to folks who feel at sea without one.
On the left we identify with our perceptions that we are the nurturing ones, who care about the weak and dispossessed, and this has come to be identified with the word 'liberal'.
I assume 'liberal' has stuck in the right-wing mind because the use of taxes in the form of government programs dedicated to those who don't function well in a hyper-materialistic, hyper-competitive society has been construed as generous, as in liberally generous.
I suspect in our minds we think that those who are weak and fall by the wayside should be entitled to the same freedoms as everyone else, just as handicapped access has given freedom to thousands of folks in wheelchairs.
Yet, 'conservative' is what the James Watts and Bill Bennets, George W. etc. think they are, as they trumpet the word 'liberal' to describe environmentalists who want to conserve the environment, while the 'conservative' would like to make unregulatedly liberal, even lavish use of natural resources as if there were no tomorrow, with terrifying possibilities of a self-fulfilling prophecy ensuing.
Neo-liberal, neo-conservative all come to muddy the terminology mashup even further, till many a curious mind glazes over with the effort to keep one's critical faculties intact and deal with all the inbred confusion coming from the use and abuse of all these terms in the modern political vocabulary.
So what?
I think this is where plain speaking comes into the equation. Most of the voting public has a five minute concentration span, and the huge crowd who are turned off of politics and don't bother to vote are repelled by all the contorted terminology and just don't have the patience to pan for little specks of meaning in all the dross hours of pundit-drone.
I don't know if this is intentional, in an Orwellian way, or is just the apex of the chattering classes conversation.
Either way I think reading Lakoff's ideas and coming to a clear, unthreatening definition of these vital labels will do more than anything else I can think of to clear political discussions of murk, and as political commentary becomes more limpid and attractive to Joe Sixpack, a whole slew of folks might respond by getting interested and involved.
Watching an earnest patrician like Kerry trying to look like 'one of the boys at the BBQ' was painful to watch, while GWB's inability to use his intellect was even worse!
Observing Kerry get demonised as a 'liberal', when the 'conservatives' hijack the constitution, loot the resources and social security (remaining very liberally generous indeed to their friends) was really to see how this confusion and perhaps deliberate obfuscation is really working for the re-pugs, turning off many, and attracting the simpletons to whom any idea of nuance is a waste of time.
As many have pointed out here, intellect is not always responsible for wingnut decisions. That desire to hate is harnessed and channelled against various demons (imaginary or not), and everyone knows where they are.
No need to reason, no need to balance or empathise, just good ol' 'us and them. Works every time....sigh.
Stripping chronic jargoneering from politics and reframing debates with clearer use of language will go a long way in putting the power back in the hands of the people, as the framers of the constitution intended it to be.
As more turn and return to interest in politics, the more proportionally will be Dems, and politicians will have a better-informed electorate to help hold them accountable, helping government forward to a greater participation and transparency.
The rise of blogging as global realtime pow-wow will continue to play a crucial role, and its refreshingly irreverent character will help tear away the confusion caused by clicque-y beltway bullshit that stops the average person enjoying the empowerment of understanding today's political polemics.
We need mantras, as simple and absurdly reductionist as can be understood by anyone, even the guy who only gives politics five minutes at the end of his weary day.
Rove has this sussed to a T; we bloviate to our peril.
If there's anything these taughtening tensions has taught me, it's that there is surely a time to simplify, clarify, explain in words of one syllable, that even a high-schooler can understand, wtf we stand for.
And that time is now