Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is happening is America is maturing and becoming more European. You have never really had politics on the European left right split nd now your two main parties are morphing into social democrat ( Dems) and Conservative (Reps) on European model.
As America reaches the mid point of her third century she is becoming older and more European.
I think you misunderstood my point due to my lack of articulating it better. When I said a moderate could take any political position I meant a person could be a moderate and be a Republican just as a person could be a moderate and a Democrat. Moderate being closest to the accepted median social more, as opposed to the examples you offered.
For the sake of example, take waterboarding. I would consider an extremist view of those who would promote waterboarding as an accepted practice and regular manner of operating. A moderate view of this would be more along the lines of someone who opposed its use entirely or would only consider it in extreme circumstances where "the ticking time bomb" scenario would apply.
The reason I see it this way is because it has been generally accepted in our society that waterboarding is a form of torture, so to deviate from our laws or even the spirit of the law moves one closer to an extreme view. The further from normally accepted behavior and practices, the more extreme it becomes.
I think the dictionary definition does it justice
1. kept or keeping within reasonable or proper limits; not extreme, excessive, or intense: a moderate price. 2. of medium quantity, extent, or amount: a moderate income. 3. mediocre or fair: moderate talent. 4. calm or mild, as of the weather. 5. of or pertaining to moderates, as in politics or religion. –noun 6. a person who is moderate in opinion or opposed to extreme views and actions, esp. in politics or religion. 7. (usually initial capital letter) a member of a political party advocating moderate reform. –verb (used with object) 8. to reduce the excessiveness of; make less violent, severe, intense, or rigorous: to moderate the sharpness of one's words. 9. to preside over or at (a public forum, meeting, discussion, etc.). –verb (used without object) 10. to become less violent, severe, intense, or rigorous. 11. to act as moderator; preside.
Well I guess what is reasonable is in the eye of the beholder. There are some that would say that any waterboarding is wrong and anyone who approves of such a thing under any circumstances is an extemist. I think if you ask most people they would say their views are reasonable and moderate.
You apparently missed something in translation, so I'll reiterate. The game afoot between extremists (defined, propagandists) serves to generate contention, divisiveness, and misattributed blame. They undermine meaningful discussions about issues and bury facts under a pile of rhetoric. When the population is sufficiently dumbed down, we the people get abused equally.
We are not in need of extremists. We are in need of each brain in the political spectrum to identify problems and articulate solutions in a political system that should foster the better ideas prevailing on the basis of meritocracy ALONE. We are NOT in need of grudge matches, of political dominance in service to preserving it's own existence, or to rag tag yahoos who armchair quarterback.
Harborlady, I'd like to introduce you to someone that
personifies the unreasonable partisan attack dog that
you instinctively know so well.
Harborlady this is you.
Harborlady, I'd like to introduce you to someone that
personifies the unreasonable partisan attack dog that
you instinctively know so well.
Harborlady this is you.
Hard to call someone partisan if you don't know what party they belong. Please do inform, I'd really like to know what party defines me.
Apparently I pared down my OP far too much. I avoided over explaining. I used the word extremist when perhaps terrorist was more appropriate. Again, the behaviors are the problem, not the ideas of any particular party in the political spectrum.
What is happening is America is maturing and becoming more European. You have never really had politics on the European left right split nd now your two main parties are morphing into social democrat ( Dems) and Conservative (Reps) on European model.
As America reaches the mid point of her third century she is becoming older and more European.
I was hoping for that, secretly, as if evolution would always be upward growth.
Where I stand I see an american political system that's regressed to a destructive level of incivility. I also see a political system that's yielded unprecedented levels of corruption. I'd like to believe that someday we can all look back and laugh at these days we're witnessing now. Wishful thinking is sometimes avoidance.
The blacks in the 60's were fighting to right a wrong... but the left is not about "rights" any more. They are about power and control even more so than the right is... and that is alot
Harborlady has a point, the radical factions of BOTH parties are the problem. You taking a side and trying to rationalize one extremist while vilifying the other does not help
I guess I just don't see the left as the enemy of our rights as much as I see the right as the totalitarianists that they blindly emulate. Food for thought, though.
Clearly you are confused. We are losing our rights because of the left who wants to control even our very thoughts The left fights for the right to force people to think like them, collective thought.
I am not confused. Extremists on BOTH sides are bad. The left swims in freer waters, in my view. Even the word liberal is based in freedom, as in allowance and tolerance. The right is very totalitarian. This is not confusion, it's from my perspective and my experience. I'm talking ideologically and broadly, not specifically about political parties or individuals. That's a whole 'nother ballgame since in politics, up is probably down, and sideways is backwards (it's a mess!).
I have posted elsewhere that in order to run the world, all you have to do is control what people think. That is occurring on a grand scale from many different angles right now. But the right's way of thinking--simplistic, symbolic, and ignorant--is the larger danger. There's a reason why the better educated are liberal. That the right fails to find virtue in intelligence is just another reason for me to find MORE fault with their version of extremism.
I tend to agree Mhouse, but that wasn't always the case. The straw that broke the camels back for me was when conservative media thought it acceptable to attack with intentions of annihilating an opposing party. Now they've got millions of minions repeating talking points. Stick a fork in me I'm done, they might as well be selling plans for concentration camps for the other half of the country. No way I can give any party behaving as such my vote.
Moderates having their own party, unfortunately, would dominate the political system and create a tyranny of the majority. Still I find myself wishful for temperance happening on both sides of the aisle to lead people away from the antics. Radical change is needful, but what I see happening by way of creative solutions is same old. Again the special interest groups are dominating the process, and again it's only serving to distract the real work needing to be done.
I think there needs to be some reigning in on both sides of the political extremes. The ACLU once had a decent mission but its become so obsessed with power and the need to dominate ameerican thought that its now more of an enemy to a free society. the same goes for the far religious right. And the far non religious left. You can't be for freedom and opportunity if you're trying to take away somebody elses.
Wouldn't we be so much better off with the Pelosi's, Reid's, Kennedy's, Hillary's, Gore's, Bush's, Cheney's,and Obama's being relegated to the sidelines of the political system? Give them their voice and chance for representation but give them no positions of leadership. 35% of the country are conservatives and 20% are liberals, so why are they fighting for control over the other the rest of us?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The left's messiah is demending that very thing, obey and serve. No Rights. No thoughts. No life. Liberalism!
