I was paraphrasing someone else. It simply means that the definition of a Liberal movement is one that strives for social progress. If a Liberal movement achieves its goal and no longer strives for progress (only defending the new status quo), then it can no longer be called Liberal.

Ah, then I certainly agree.

I would say that neo-Liberalism is the result of corporate influence, not the GOP. Clinton was the first Democrat to put the election results ahead of the mandat, and his campaign staffers recognized that corporate donors were the key to winning modern elections.

I think we can safely pin corporate influence over government on modern conservatives. Clinton's "pivot" was a reaction to conservative victories in an attempt to catch up to the change in demographics.