This would have looked just as ugly, but reversed, if done from a conservative perspective. Where’s the civil part in our civil discourse? We have a lot to learn. Here’s a great vid on how:
http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_lesser_take_the_other_to_lunch.html

The description states, “Project Liberal vs. Conservative as words clouds is our attempt to find out what words we associate with the terms.” The first order of business is to define “we” and “our”. If “we” are Liberals only, then the project should NOT try to skew the views of Liberals by tainting them with the opinions of Conservatives. If “we” are both Liberals and Conservatives, then perhaps Liberals should only be allowed to express their opinions of Conservatives and vice versa. That way, Ls can see how THEY are viewed by Cs and Cs can see how Ls view THEM.

Alternatively, the words could be restricted to those which are not “loaded”, ie, those with neutral connotations. I am certain there are other ways this project could be structured to provide some useful information, but as Jesse so aptly put it, right now, “this [project] can’t be taken seriously… it’s just a bunch of my fellow dems … painting a very closed-minded picture…” If you doubt his words, just look at the “word clouds” themselves. The “liberal” words, almost exclusively, apply only to those Liberals who aspire to the very highest moral standards, NOT to the average Liberal while the “conservative” words, almost exclusively, apply only to those who epitomize the most despicable elements of a bastardized pseudo-conservative philosophy, not to those who believe in and abide by the highest ethical precepts.

BTW, if this fb page were “Being Conservative” and it had this same project, I seriously doubt that the “word clouds” would be any less offensive to Liberals of conscience than the actual “word clouds” are to open-minded Conservatives.