There is no way you could describe the term 'liberal' in a definition.

I just did.

... moderate socialism

You say this like it's as abhorent as a facist state or a religious oligarchy. "Moderate socialism" is a term that, in its generality, describes most European countries, as well as Canada. These are perfectly sane, rational ways to run the show.

The ideals at the respective extreme are behind most views of conservatives and liberals.

At the extremes, on either end, you get entirely unpleasant effects. Systems of government (and more generally, of society) are far more complex and subtle than "going all the way" to your favorite ends. Modern society is all about creating a balance among conflicting interests, whether through market-driven or regulatory mechanisms.

Unfortunately, modern politics being what they are, particularly in the U.S. two-party system, there's a deliberate movement to create an artificial "us vs. them" mentality as a way of painting the other party as a bunch of doddering slobs who will destroy God, truth, and the American Way (tm) if we only gave them the chance. If you let yourself look past that, you'll find that there are politicians on both sides of the aisle both with and without a clue. You can't reduce the entire spectrum of political thought to a one-dimensional axis with the end points labelled "conservative" and "liberal".

(Of course, you can always try to believe in such artificial labels, but that doesn't make you a conservative or a liberal. It makes you an idiot.)