I would describe myself as part of that liberal left in that most of my politics lie generally left of center (my score on that political compass test places me right about on top of the spot that says Ghandi) and I happen to agree with you wholeheartedly. I don't know that there are too many people online who are open minded enough to be willing to listen, but I think the whole notion of liberality has been coopted by the radical left as characterized by Noam Chomsky, ANSWER, ISM and others whose views towards the world are inconsistant to the point of complete hypocricy and who act as such apologists for terrorism that they represent a fifth column.
I ain't one of them.
I'm not sure whether too many people would listen to you having that big elephant next to your name, and that's not because there is anything objectionable to what you are saying, but because of the label, itself. IMO Far too many people base their politics on labeling (and this works from both sides of the aisle) rather than values, as they tend to react against others rather than forming a consistant ideology of their own. It's a defense mechanism applied to a group identity as far as I'm concerned, in that people extend their own ego to cover the generalized group with whom they identify. This is where the apologia comes in, in that people feel it necessary to defend anything they feel attacks their group, and this despite the fact that what is being attacked really isn't really part of their group if people were to give the matter a little more thought. The end restult of such politics is that as rhetorec becomes more and more shrill, more polemic and more extreme, people gradually encompass that rhetorec and so it does become part of their group think.
As far as reactive politics, I think many people woke up on 9-11 shell shocked, and without having much in the way of political knowlege, looked to the internet to supply the background. Many of the more reactive leftists (of whom there are countless numbers) who unwittingly subscribe to the notion that an enemy of one's enemy is one's friend have driven themselves towards anything that stands against Bush. This has led to the preponderance of many of the antisemitic conspiracy theories people spout, as many of the sites people visit are not just against Bush, but subtly or not so subtly sympathetic towards Islamism and the actions commited by Islamists. They are picking up the attitudes along with the rhetorec, and the extreme left now hold hands with the extreme right.
You mentioned your pipe dream. Mine is that reasonable liberals will tell the lunatic fringe left to f.o., and reasonable conservatives will tell the lunatic fringe right to f.o., and both will find they have more in common with each other than with the fringes of either. A good place to start would be to put aside all this "you liberals" and "you conservatives" stuff that only acts to reinforce the differences that may be more minor than people think.
