Who decided that “liberal” was going to be a bad thing? I started wondering about that after hearing presidential candidates slinging that word at each other as if it were the worst insult they could use. So I looked the word up on Dictionary.com and here are some of the definitions:

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.  So progress is bad?

2. noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. Again, progress…as in, not going backward, but forward. And that’s bad?

3. free from predjudice or bigotry; tolerant. Hmmm, that sounds good to me.

4. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. Okay, that could be scary.

5. given freely or abundantly; generous.

Those are just some of the definitions. I understand that the way it is used in politics these days seems to mean that someone is just way too radical for most people’s tastes. But who decided that would be the newest meaning when the dictionary seems to give such nice definitions for the word? Just wondering…

I know that this will shock at least a couple of people….I have a sort of political comment.

Tonight is the Iowa caucus. That’s where the different parties decide on which candidate they will support. Now, not surprising, I’m not real clear if that dictates the candidate for each party only in that state, or if the rest of the states just go along with the Iowans. They explained it fairly well on the Today Show, but I didn’t listen very closely, because, well, I really can’t muster that much interest. I’m not very confident that my vote for president counts, anyway. (that was the political comment.)

So, to the reason for this blog. I was watching our local news this afternoon. They do an hour long show from 12-1 and cover a variety of local & national news, as well as just local gossip type stuff. The host of this news show is the anchor for that channel and has been there since I was a teenager. So this means he’s been doing the news for at least 30 years, right? He asked, on the air, “what is a caucus?”

Ok, for me or you to not know is one thing. For a career news reporter to not know is almost inexcusable and baffling. (Unless he’s developing alzheimer’s, in which case I apologize.) How can you cover at least 7 presidential elections and not know this?  I thought those folks knew everything. Sigh. Another illusion shattered.