Online Only: The L-word

It's official. Sen. Hillary Clinton became the latest Democrat to announce a presidential run -- I mean, a Presidential Exploratory Committee. Undoubtedly, Clinton gives hope to many: She is the best shot to be this country's first woman president. Such an achievement would establish equality more than any other, unless, of course, we could elect a black president.\nEven without the potential history that could be made, the Democratic primaries have always intrigued me.\nContrasted with Republican primaries, where the more conservative a candidate is, the better his (or her) chance of being nominated by the party, the same cannot be said of Democratic primaries. Since President Clinton's ascension to power in 1992, moderation has been the key to success. The theory was that a liberal would never be able to carry the South, so it was imperative to display some "moderate" credentials, whether it be through "fiscal discipline" or "tax reform."\nApart from making us liberals look like elitists who are out of touch with the country, this theory also highlights how mangled the Democrats' message has become. The Democratic Party has historically been the party of the middle class, but somehow we seem to have become a party of the rich, thanks to visionaries like Karl Rove and Frank Luntz. \nSo while "centrist" has become the new catchphrase of the party, no one seems to prefer the label "liberal" anymore. No leaders exhibit this phenomenon better than Sens. Clinton and Barack Obama. The two leaders have worked tirelessly in their efforts to "bridge divides" between "Red America" and "Blue America," a concept as ridiculous as it sounds. So while Sen. Obama supports voluntary prayer in school and tries to build a solid base within the evangelical community, Sen. Clinton introduced a bill to make flag burning illegal and has spoken out vehemently against violent content in video games. And don't even get me started on the Iraqi invasion and her continued support for it. \nHasn't Sen. Obama heard of something in the Constitution called the "separation of church and state"? And has this country run out of all problems that Congress spends time legislating on flag burning? This blatant pandering is very disappointing to people who want some real change. I've had enough of the "listening tours" and the supposed talk of "bipartisanship." We're all thirsting for ideas. \nIn this mad quest to win elections, the Democratic Party has lost so much of its moral ground. The two-party system that thrived in our country is coming to resemble a system more like China's. If we give voters a choice between a moderate Democrat and a conservative Republican, it isn't really a choice. When men like Russ Feingold are shut out from their own party's political process for being "too progressive," it speaks volumes about the current state of the party.\nHere's hoping for the day when "liberal" isn't just a dirty word anymore.