Why do Republicans Claim Barack Obama is the "most liberal" Senator as if it's a Bad Thing to be "Liberal"? ?

I have an issue with Republicans continuously claiming that Barack Obama is the "most liberal" senator. I believe in 2004 when John Kerry was running Republicans claimed HE was the "most liberal." Then of course, there's Ted Kennedy who often gets labeled as the "most liberal." It seems to me that Republicans attach the term "liberal" to someone as if it's a bad thing. According to Merriam Webster,
Liberal means : "generous, bountiful not narrow in judgement or opinion, and tolerant."
Conservative means "perservative, disposed to maintaining existing views, conditions or institutions."
So Conservatives are stuck in the past, dislike change and would rather keep things the way they are because they're working for THEM.
Liberals are progressive, forward looking, open minded and wish to make changes that work better for ALL. Call me a "liberal" then, it's not an insult even if YOU believe it is...

Your Thoughts?

Yeah, Republicans just like to spend money they don't have and then have to borrow money from China to stimulate OUR economy.

Liberal is a bad thing.

Big taxing, big spending, military-hating, America-blaming, cluelessness.

Liberals are progressive, forward looking, open minded and wish to make changes that work better for ALL.

YES, WITH SOMEONE ELSES MONEY!

There you go, use a definition that has absolutely nothing to do with the context in which the words are used.

I, too, have objections to Republicans crying "most liberal" at every politician whom they are trying to belittle. The problem is basically just like the problem of the boy who cried "wolf." In order for the charge to be taken seriously, it needs to be used sparingly and accurately.

As to why "liberal" is a "bad word," see my answer to this question.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
.

The definition of liberal as given by Merriam Webster is an exact opposite of what the word means in a political context, is that clear enough for you?

I don't care what you call Obama -- I call him a traitor and his actions speak louder than his words. He refuses to enforce the laws of the land -- comes from a sanctuary city -- which, by the way, he did nothing about. Allowed an illegal immigrant fugitive to hole up in a church without demanding that the laws be enforced -- in fact, he went to bat for the illegal immigrant fugitive. He panders to illegal immigrants. He failed to live up to this oath of office as a Senator and as an officer of the court. He and his wife made deals with a gangster (s) and he has proven that he can't be trusted to do anything but the wrong thing. I wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances. The clincher was when he said "Si, se puede" which proved that he will continue to refuse to uphold his oath of office. I think he and all the others currently running should be tried for treason instead of being allowed to run for the highest office in the land.

I could call a cat a dog, it's still a cat.

Funny how out of context "labels" are used to promote ideology that is contrary to the word. People around here even call terrorists "freedom fighters".

The usual definition of "liberal" in a political context, is someone who supports social liberalism. Bigger government, more intrusion in our lives. I'm sure some people will disagree, but look at the policies of "liberals" and I can't see how people can deny it.

As far being progressive, I'd say my support of school vouchers, privatizing social security, fair tax, are progressive positions.

BTW, I call myself a liberal, ie for liberty, a person who wants minimum intrusion by the federal government as possible.

Because it is.