English, I take great exception to your definition of a liberal.

Miriam-Webster says "liberal" means: 1lib·er·al
Pronunciation: \ˈli-b(ə-)rəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lēodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a: of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts <liberal education> barchaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a: marked by generosity : openhanded <a liberal giver> b: given or provided in a generous and openhanded way <a liberal meal> c: ample, full
3obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
4: not literal or strict : loose <a liberal translation>
5: broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a: of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism bcapitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
— lib·er·al·ly \-b(ə-)rə-lē\ adverb
— lib·er·al·ness noun
synonyms liberal, generous, bountiful, munificent mean giving or given freely and unstintingly. liberal suggests openhandedness in the giver and largeness in the thing or amount given <a teacher liberal with her praise>. generous stresses warmhearted readiness to give more than size or importance of the gift <a generous offer of help>. bountiful suggests lavish, unremitting giving or providing <children spoiled by bountiful presents>. munificent suggests a scale of giving appropriate to lords or princes <a munificent foundation grant>.

Princeton University describes a liberal as:

broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant ...
having political or social views favoring reform and progress
tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets


I've found that most liberals are generous to a fault -- not just of YOUR money, but their own as well. They are also eternal optimists, hoping that good will come of the use of those funds.

Personally, I see nothing wrong of being tolerant of change nor of being pro-civil rights. Favoring reform and progress isn't that bad of a thing, either.

As to your statistics, you make an easy assessment basically putting the blame on a Democratic Congress. Some basic realities are that "creative financing" for home purchases occurred in the late 90s and early 2000s. Those packages have now reached the time where those homeowners have to refinance but have neither the equity nor the ratios to qualify -- they didn't when they got the loans, they don't today. That's why foreclosures are skyrocketing.

Unemployment is occurring because more and more corporations are taking their business overseas. Again, this is not something recent but has been an ongoing problem for the past decade, no matter what side was in power. Unemployment will probably continue to rise as prices continue to rise and small companies go bankrupt and middle-sized companies go overseas. Milk prices have increased over 100% in the past five years and probably will continue to do so. We have yet to reach European (or even Canadian) prices for gasoline. Alaskan gasoline is sold to Japan because they'll pay more for it. They have had contracts with the Alaskan pipeline companies since its inception (yes, I know it is technically the Aleyska Pipeline Company but many oil companies own large blocks of it).

To put the blame of today's woes on any one party, group or entity is ridiculous. About the only thing that can be laid fairly on one person's shoulders is the Iraqi War. There is little doubt that Bush pushed hard and fast to start this war, got other countries on board, stated unproven rumors (WMD) as fact.

The question today shouldn't be who to blame but rather how to solve some of these problems. How do we get corporations to stay in the US without totally bailing them out? How do we save peoples' homes when there was no sound fiscal reasoning in the purchase or should we even save them? What jobs can be reasonable created that will truly help America and not just be make work and add more to the national debt?

America needs to do something about its education woes. No child left behind is a farce. It is more like no child will get an education and children will not be held accountable for failing. We put more stock in state-regulated testing than in educating our children -- teachers today teach kids to pass the test rather than teach for a child to learn.

So, back to my argument, we liberals don't want to give everything away. We want real solutions. We don't want to hear a bunch of stupid "it's your fault, no, it's yours!" If it takes change to get this beautiful country on track, then let's start changing it!

Okay, off of my high horse ... at least for now.