DU moderates! What are the values on which you hold firm?

[ulysses]

Do you have any? If you draw the line anywhere, where?

[LoZoccolo]

1. They're usually the same as "progressives" [sic]...

...it's just we don't like to be asses about it.

[ulysses]

2. answer the question.

As far as I can tell, y'all would compromise your own right to breathe if you thought it would make you more popular in Topeka.

So, what are they, LoZoccolo? What are those ideals on which you base your political self-definition, and on which you won't compromise?

[LoZoccolo]

11. The first value of a moderate is to let the DLC take over everything.

The DLC is the only political body on earth with the right ideals to lead our nation to greatness, and anything that threatens to knock the DLC from it's position as king of the mountain of the DNC must be thwarted, using our vast resources in the media if necessary (see how we took Dean from the top spot in the primaries, that was all us), and supressing grassroots activism.

The second value of a moderate is LET THE DLC TAKE OVER EVERYTHING! Got it?

The third value of a moderate is to make sure the Democratic Party is no different than the Republican party. This is a must. Except for the war, terrorism strategy, labor policy, individual freedoms, economic policy, judicial nominees, separation of church and state, affirmative action, reproductive freedoms, taxes, and social services (pittances, all), you can see we've succeeded. Check!

The fourth value of a moderate is to make sure you do everything to annoy and disappoint grassroots activists. The fourth one is what I call "the fun one" because we do it just for fun.

[ulysses]

19. sarcasm's always easier, isn't it?

:)

Should I just quit asking you to answer the question?

[LoZoccolo]

20. How about this.

Next time you argue a specific issue, think through the whole thing, especially with regards to whether or not we're actually going to see a solution, rather than picking a side based on what's considered "left" or "moderate". That's why this conversation is so vapid an amorphous, because it isn't about anything.

[ulysses]

22. I'll take that as a "yes", then.

Is it because you don't *have* any values that you consider inviolable, or do you just not want to talk about them?

[LoZoccolo]

23. You might wonder what kind of person I am...

...you might wonder, hey, where did this kind of person, this "moderate" come from? Like, if you were in high school, could you pick out who was going to become the moderates? Now that's a trick question, and I'll tell you why: we're from outer space. How crazy is that, yeah? We're here to take over the planet and use it for raw materials. The first step is corporate sponsorship of the Democratic Party. The second step? Well, could you do anything about it if you even knew about it? Baaaa ha ha ha ha! You are doomed, feeble earthling!

[ulysses]

26. ?

[Cheswick2.0]

46. In other words you don't know what your values are?

[Forkboy]

30. "it's just we don't like to be asses about it."

Who says irony is dead?

[Cheswick2.0]

47. LOL

you have a good point there.

[Placebo]

3. MUST READ: Bill Clinton From Thursday...

"When I became president the world was a new and very different place, as I said. And I thought about how we ought to confront it. America has two great dominant strands of political thought; we're represented up here on this stage: conservatism, which at its very best draws lines that should not be crossed; and progressivism, which at its very best breaks down barriers that are no longer needed or should never have been erected in the first place.

It seemed to me that in 1992 we needed to do both to prepare America for the 21st century -- to be more conservative in things like erasing the deficit and paying down the debt, and preventing crime and punishing criminals, and protecting and supporting families, and enforcing things like child support laws, and reforming the military to meet the new challenges of the 21st century; and we needed to be more progressive in creating good jobs, reducing poverty, increasing the quality of public education, opening the doors of college to all, increasing access to health care, investing more in science and technology, and building new alliances with our former adversaries, and working for peace across the world and peace in America, across all the lines that divide us.

Now when I proposed to do both, we said that all of them were consistent with the great American values of opportunity, responsibility and community. We labeled the approach "New Democrat." It then become known as "the Third Way." It was -- as it was embraced by progressive parties across the world.

But I like the slogan we had way back in 1992, "putting people first," because in the end, I always kept score by a simple measure: Were ordinary people better off when I stopped than when I started?"
—Bill Clinton

That's what being a moderate means to me. And why I consider myself a 'Clinton Democrat'.

[ulysses]

6. the question was about you, not Bill Clinton.

And some leftists get accused of hero worship...:eyes:

[Placebo]

7. Well he said it better than I ever could.

What more do you want?

[ulysses]

10. oh, I don't know.

The demonstrated capacity for independent thought, maybe?

[Placebo]

14. What's your problem?

Condescend, ridicule, and question others on their beliefs is all you seem capable of doing.

Why are you being such a pompous ass?

[LoZoccolo]

16. Hey, that goes back to my post #1!

:bounce:

[Lucky Luciano]

18. LOLOLOLOL! nt

[ulysses]

21. how can I condescend and ridicule you on your beliefs

when you haven't given them? I did question, yes, because I'd like to know.

Why are you being such a pompous ass?

So sorry to have offended. Watching my party being taken over by those who want to make nice with neoconservatives makes me a bit irritable.

[sangh0]

65. How can you condescend and ridicule w/o knowing their beliefs??

A: "with little difficulty"

[Zhade]

75. He did say it very well. Very well, indeed.

It's too bad that the reality fell so very short of the mark, particularly with regard to foreign policy.

I do find it amusing that the DLC's motto used to be "putting people first", when the reality is that corporations jumped to the head of the line right after Clinton was elected.

Ah, irony!

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

92. Oh, yeah, and I'll put to death humans of limited mental capabilities . .

to prove I'm tough on crime. I'm NO Michael Dukakis.

The only reason Clinton is praised by lefties is because he provoked the ire of the right and BEAT them at every turn.

[AuntPatsy]

4. My own I attempt to hold firm, other people's values are not

my business to judge which is why I voted the way that I did, I judge only myself and my kids, on them I am allowed...

[AuntPatsy]

5. Oh, and those who have decided to speak for me, they surely

have to stand firm as well which I have not been seeing too much of late by these so called Democrats.....I am allowed to judge them, I am after all their employer...

[NEDem]

8. The Bill of Rights and Constitution.

As far as I'm concerned these are the untouchables. For me the ENTIRE Bill of Rights and every word of the Constitution is sacred and shouldn't be f'ed with. The creators of these documents were very wise men who knew what they were doing.

[ulysses]

15. ok, leaving aside

the times that the Constitution has been f'ed with for righteous reasons, how do you stand on the prisoners currently held at Guantanamo as regards the sixth amendment?

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[janx]

9. Civil rights, environment, fiscal responsibility, foreign policy, and

education.

Those are off the top of my head.

[Cheswick2.0]

48. Hi my favorite moderate

I'd love it if you could expand a bit on those, since I know you will have good ideas.

[noamnety]

12. I tried writing a little manifesto tonight

I am conservative.
I am fiscally conservative; I oppose borrowing money I cannot repay. I believe in conserving the environment. I believe in conserving endangered species. I believe in conserving natural resources.

I am are pro-life.
I support living beings. I support health care for all people. I oppose corporate pollution at the expense of people's health. I oppose mercury and arsenic in our children's drinking water. I reject a culture of torture.

I believe in religious freedom.
I support evangelicals; I embrace their right to worship as they wish, and to discuss and share their views with others. I oppose extreme fundamentalists of any religion who strive to use government assets to impose their religious laws or beliefs on others.

I am a realist.
While I appreciate the romantic idealism of the current administration, I believe it is naive and dangerous. It is realistic to realize we will enrage the Arab world by invading Iraq. It was naive to believe we would be greeted with flowers as liberators. It is a harsh realism to admit that if we outlaw abortions, people will find more dangerous ways to accomplish the same goal. It is naive to believe people will still carry unwanted children to term without resorting to other means. It is a matter of being practical to acknowledge that unmarried people will have sex, and therefore need access to birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. It is naive to believe that you can just tell people not to have sex until they are married, and the problem will disappear.

I am compassionate.
I do not believe people should be taxed beyond their ability to pay. If that means the elite have to invest the same percentage of their income in taxes as they did in the 90's, then that is how it must be. I reject the notion that if poor people spend an unaffordable portion of their salary to taxes, and the rich are allowed to keep more of their money to themselves, that this will lead to more opportunities for the poor to get ahead.

I believe in civil rights.
I believe that all people deserve the same access to polling places, regardless of their race, income level, or whether they live in an urban or rural area. I believe that people who share their lives together deserve the same basic rights to emotional and financial security regardless of their sexual orientation. I believe that the sanctity of marriage is found in the level of commitment, love, and mutual respect of a couple, not in their plans or ability to reproduce.

[charlie]

28. Excellent

That's a good, concise declaration of beliefs. Well done, I enjoyed reading it :thumbsup:

[katsy]

31. Bravo!

Now email this to the dnc... they need a refresher course in
addressing the needs of their constituency.

[newyawker99]

54. Hi katsy!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Zhade]

76. In some ways, then, you are a "compassionate conservative".

Only you really mean it, as opposed to the traitor in the White House.

Great post.

[Lucky Luciano]

13. I am a moderate

I belive phoney baloney (bologna?) wars are the antithesis of what the USA should stand for.

I believe people should be taught to think and question everything so that they may come to rational conclusions. Too much of our electorate was brainwashed and controlled by b*sh and the media. All the b*shbots have what i call conditioned 'PavRovian' responses on why they did not like Kerry - "He is a flip-flopper" - "he's a liberal" - "He wants to spend my money" - "He'll make the US gay" - "he wants to ban the bible" - "He wants to make the US weak" - "He want to let France decide our national security" - blah blah blah blah - I wish people would think for themselves rather than being ultra-obedient while Rove spoonfeeds them sound bites.

I believe in fiscal conservatism and eliminating not only our deficit, but our debt.

I believe we should eliminate said deficit by reimposing the tax on the rich - mostly because it is the rich people who so blatantly fucked up our deficit sitaution. Once the debt is in the clear, I will become more in favor of a less progressive tax code (gasp! Holding shield to protect myself from tomatoes being thrown my way), but one in which the first $30K of an income is tax free - then some allowances for children and that is all.

I believe in saftey nets, but I also believe in not depending on them. So able bodied people should go into workfare programs after one year - one such workfare program will be for government run daycare centers so people cannot blame their not working on lack of daycare.

I believe in no dsicrimination based on race, sex, creed, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, etc - I have no problem with gay people wanting to get married. It doesn't affect me! Why should it affect other heteros is beyond me! :shrug:

I believe in total separation of church and state - no compromises there.

I believe in ending the war on drugs and all of the crap derived from it like people incarcerated for many years on trivial offenses - let them all free as of tomorrow - what a farce.

I'm not a big fan of affirmative action (sorry - holding shield again). I would rather infiltrate the schools that have many minorities and teach them to have the confidence and hope to succeed - gotta get them when they are young though. Electives for African history in HS or Latino history in HS could be good to help these young people feel confident that they are considered an important and integral part of our society, but passing over someone with better qualifications on the basis of race alone is discrimination and should not be tolerated. Either that, or have affirmative action be based exclusively on income - not race - plenty of Po' white folks could use the same help - I still think this is reverse discrimination based on income though - I'll have to think about it.

I believe in being an internationalist - world cooperation is crucial in this day and age of instant communication.

Racist wars should never be tolerated and the perpetrators of such wars should see their day in The Hague IMO - example - Do you think b*sh would bomb the fuck out of Iraq if everything else being equal, Iraq was a White and Christian country? The answer is obviously not - therefore this is a racist war. Try b*sh for war crimes.

I could go on....

[ulysses]

24. ok, fair enough.

Thank you - first straight answer I've gotten in the thread.

As a side note, what jobs do you expect welfare recipients to get after one year? Good point on the child care, but are you going to provide training?

Also, I teach in an urban middle school, and I think your affirmative action position could use more thought.

Beyond these, I'd call you a liberal if asked.

[Lucky Luciano]

29. Some jobs don't need training

Clean graffiti...or pick up garbage on the side of the road. Anything is a better use of our money than sitting at home getting free money. I don't know how to train people that could not get trained in school. However, some of the people on welfare do actually have skills - they could train the others that do not. Maybe someone who once was a carpenter, but got hurt really badly to the point where they could not work could help train others. Such a person would probably like to do that because staying at home injured can give cabin fever in a big way.

Affirmative Action - still nto a big fan.

I am surprised that you let my less progressive tax code (once the debt is paid off that is) slip by though. I am definitely a fiscal conservative.

Maybe it is just because I am into finance that I think with that kind of logic.

[ulysses]

32. you're still talking about public works projects

with graffiti and trash pickup. Public money, public works.

I am surprised that you let my less progressive tax code (once the debt is paid off that is) slip by though. I am definitely a fiscal conservative.

The problem is with your assumption of my position as a progressive. You put a $30k lower limit on taxation, which doesn't thrill me, but with which I think I can work, even being the rigid ideologue that I am. ;-)

[MichiganVote]

17. Provide for and protect the young, they bring the future

Educate ourselves and educate others, we are our best teachers

Stay out of debt, it reduces one's options

Fight when a fight is before us, not ahead or behind us

Feed commerce, but don't get eaten

Permit reason not remorse to rule

Mind your own business, if you haven't made the front page, count your blessings

[ulysses]

27. largely sound in my humble opinion, and for what it's worth,

but not really what I had in mind. Can you be more specific?

[MichiganVote]

53. Sure. I don't vote republican b/c they do not represent my values

They spend too much damn money on junk (pork in bills).

They cheat when it comes to education.(next ot no money for NCLB)

They overreact when it comes to conflicts throughout the world or they don't react at all. (Iraq,Sudan, N. Korea,Iran,China)

They propose programs that are fullfilling for a few but miss the broader picture. (Poor trade agreements,faith based initiatives, etc)

[sangh0]

66. uly, values aren't all that specific

In fact, I suspect that what you really want to know is what POLICY POSITIONS they won't compromise on. I say this because I noticed that you seem satisfied by those responses which list POSITIONS, not values.

For example, you praise one post which lists things like "seperation of church and state". That is not a value, it is a position. If you want to know the posters value, you have to ask "WHY do you support the seperation of church and state?"

The answer is "Because it's wrong to force someone to obey someone else's morality and religious beliefs". IOW, the value is "freedom of thought" We value Freedom of Thought (and Conscience)

[ulysses]

68. semantics.

Ok, policy positions, if it makes you happy. :shrug:

[sangh0]

69. Do you know what the word "semantics" mean?

It deals with the meaning of words. If you don't know what your words mean, how can you expect to get a satisfying response?

[ulysses]

71. I suppose I don't put as big a gulf

between my values and my policy positions as some might.

Not sure why you find this such a big sticking point...

[sangh0]

72. Because people with the same values can support opposite policies

The value expressed as a belief in the "sanctity of human life" leads conservatives to oppose abortion (on the belief that a fetus is a human life and a person) while it leads liberal to support abortion (because it protects the life of the mother)

I also think it's an important distinction because liberals are under assault for supposedly having no values, and that perception is enhanced when liberals confuse values with opinions and positions.

[RafterMan]

25. No.

My only value comes from my time as a graphic designer: "Is it working?"

Right now, it isn't working. That's why I've turned to the Democrats -- they might not be working either, but they don't seem to have the suicidal impulses of the neocon Republicans.

[kodi]

33. you gotta' be joking. these guys make gumby look rock-solid

democratic moderate politicians are pussys who are afraid to stand up for any belief if it causes them discomfort. essentially they are moral and ethical cowards who i trust less than the radical right to be honest.

i believe the ability to compromise is a necessary evil, but only as a last resort, but moderate democrats are sellouts who play the compromise card as their first one on the table.

a spine-less jellyfish should be on their banner that is emblazened with "we'll fold if you push us."

[ulysses]

35. my friend,

you're starting to sound like me circa 2000. :D

[kodi]

37. fine, as long as i dont look like you circa 2000

:evilgrin:

[ulysses]

38. hey - I have tiedye associated with you

ya old hippie. :D

[seabeyond]

34. abortion, civil liberties

defense of gays, but i dont need marriage, civil union good enough for me. seperation of church and state. leaving constitution alone

[ulysses]

36. ok.

How do you reconcile the moderation thing - which pretty much requires playing nice with the GOP - with all of these?

[kodi]

40. the GOP is the Borg. how far do we have to retreat before we see it?

we are doing exactly the wrong thing to compromise with these fascist bastards. they respect only one thing, strength. failure to show it will provoke them to run right over us.

we need to go on the attack against bush and his brown shirts everywhere we can.

[seabeyond]

104. you are talking to a peson n that thinks bush stole the election

i think there was a ground swell for kerry. and i think it was because of these issues. and the more people that see this taken away, the more people that may become aware and create a larger groundswell

so no, i dont think reneging on these things are going to do us any good. i think we are on the right track.

[JHBowden]

39. Secular values

If we give up these, we'd might as well be the United States of Ameristan.

[Leilani]

41. Ok, I'm a proud moderate

& here's what I believe:

1. I love my country; there are problems right now, but it's because of the people running the gov't. I'm not running to any foreign country. I will stay here & fight, because this country IS worth fighting for. And I'm tired of hearing how my country stinks...some of the people stink, but the country doesn't stink.

2. The people in gov't work for us, & we aren't holding them accountable. Republicans have become the party of the corporations, but Dems in the Beltway have also lost their way. Once they get to DC, they get Potomic fever, & can't relate to us anymore.

3. I am a fiscal conservative. The Congress is wasting SO much money on so much crap, & I despise the defecit. I have to pay my bills; so should they. They need to go through the budget, & get rid of ALL unnecessary programs, pork, etc.

4. Taxation..I believe in a fair, graduated income tax; those who make the most, pay the most. We should help the working poor, & stop gouging the middle class.

5. Politicians..our founding fathers envisioned a citizen govt. I would like to see term limits. 2 terms for Senate; 5 or 6 terms of reps.

6. Clean elections..all paper ballots, all races publically financed, TV must give free air time...the people own the airwaves.

7. Health care..access for all..make insurance affordable, help people with their payments, have minimum standards of healthcare that must be accessed by all. But keep health care private. I dealt with military health care, & it was an abomination.

8.Education...it's broken, & I don't know how to fix it. We are lagging behind all industrialized countries. Teachers are expected to provide a hell of a lot more than just teaching. They cannot take the place of a family & should not be expected to. Also, throwing money is not the answer...some schools need more money, but sucess in schools is not directly related to amount spent per pupil.

9.I support our military. When the Pentagon sends the troops into uncalled for, unjust wars, we need to hold the Pentagon responsible, & not dump on troops. War should remain as LAST resort, not 1st idea.

10.Environment...we should do all we can to preserve & protect our environment for future generations. This is a requirement.

11. Govt has no business in people's personal lives, unless they are endangering someone. Stay out of people's sex lives, marriages, medical lives (medical marajuana) etc.

12. I believe in the 2nd amendment, & also think safeguards should be in place to prevent people getting guns who shouldn't have them. Also, just like driving, people should have to take gun safety courses.

13. Separation of church & state.

There's a lot more, but that's enough for now.

[sangh0]

67. Now THOSE come awfully close to values!!

Good work

1) Patriotism (ie loyalty)

2) accountability

3) Financial responsibility & efficiency

4) (Distributional) Fairness

5) Merit (as opposed to aristocracy, elitism or the Moral Order)

6) (Electoral) Fairness & Equality

7) Nurture and Compassion

8) Nurturance and efficiency (see #3)

9) Protection and self-defense

10) Nurturance and protection

11) Independence, self-reliance, and individual liberty

12) Protection

13) Not a value, but 12 out of 13 is EXCELLENT!!

Ironic that it's an "unprincipled moderate" that's posted their values, while some of the liberals think values = positions

[Leilani]

88. Huh?

Unprincipled moderate?

Are you talking to me?

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Leilani]

91. Thanks, sangh0!

I didn't get it!

[rman]

99. "fiscal conservative" - are you sure about that?

...this CONSERVATIVE government is wasting SO much money on so much crap...
thus running enormous defecits, spending way beyond their means, wrecking the economy and the lives of millions of people.

previous LIBERAL governments spend so much money on things that ended up reducing the deficit, improving the economy and improving the standard of living for millions of people.


Now, are you still sure you want to be a "fiscal conservative" rather then a "fiscal liberal/progressive"?

[MrModerate]

42. As you can see by my sig, I think I'm a moderate

But as I've gone through this thread, it seems you -- and a lot of the people who agree with you -- define moderate as "coward."

Which clearly I don't buy.

From my point of view "moderate" is more of an approach than a set of beliefs. A willingness to listen, to attempt political discourse at something below a shout. Understanding that voters we disagree with thought they were voting for values we share too -- regardless of how deluded we consider their actions to me. To find a way to make things work.

My irreducible values?

- Abortion on demand. Period.
- Separation of church and state. Period.
- The rich to pay higher taxes (because they can afford it painlessly and as the cost of the system that lets them get and stay rich).
- Preventive wars maybe, preemptive wars never.
- No death penalty. Period. Life in prison without parole for people who deserve it, yes.
- The only legitimate weapon in the war on drugs: education.
- Gay marriage, yes; benefits for civil unions/partners, no (because the commitment to be a family is what, in my mind, makes you eligible to share a spouse's benefits).
- No draft, except in extremely dire situations (which I don't expect will ever recur)
- No stupid, expensive arms programs: Star wars, bunker-busting nukes, attack submarines, half-billion-dollar fighters, etc., etc.
- Manned space flight paid by taxpayers, yes.

This isn't comprehensive -- I'm an issue-based sort of person rather than political schema type, so you ask me a question and I'll give you an answer.

[ulysses]

43. ok, thanks - now I'll ask you the same question I asked seabeyond.

How do you reconcile these beliefs with an outlook of compromise with the right wing?

[MrModerate]

59. Don't fully understand your question, but . . .

I'll give it a shot.

The beliefs I listed are irreducible for me. However, not all of them are attainable right now. Some because they're minority views across the whole country (meaning we've got some convincing to do or, as it's been expressed elsewhere on DU, some marketing), some because crackpot shitheads now in power wickedly oppose them.

Also, I'm not in the gummint. I'm just a citizen.

So I do the citizen thing: express my opinion, both when it will have effect and when it doesn't; support the party and politicians I think best represent my position and my values; try to live according to these values to the degree an imperfect person can; and vote, vote, vote whenever I can, convinced that's one of the best ways to bring about what I believe in.

Day-to-day, the politicians I support have to work within a government that must keep running. Does it infuriate me when they sell out for some temporary advantage (which invariably backfires)? Hell yes! But do I think they should try to preserve utter purity and never compromise on anything -- effectively eliminating their own effectiveness? Hell no!

Someone once said something about politics being the art of the possible. Perhaps one of our more learned colleagues here can weigh in on that.

[ulysses]

70. I think you understood it.

Does it infuriate me when they sell out for some temporary advantage (which invariably backfires)? Hell yes! But do I think they should try to preserve utter purity and never compromise on anything -- effectively eliminating their own effectiveness? Hell no!

Couple of problems with that, although I understand where you're coming from. First off, the Republicans have no interest in actual compromise. We can compromise all we want, and that's the art of the possible thing and how things are supposed to work...but things *don't* work that way now. You don't compromise with a snake or with a neoconservative.

Secondly, bear in mind that we were in much the same position in 1992 that the GOP is now. Newt Gingrich didn't scale back his proposals out of fear of damaging his effectiveness - he put out a big plan and won control of Congress two years later.

[sangh0]

73. Not true

First off, the Republicans have no interest in actual compromise

bush* compromised with Kennedy and approved the elimination of school vouchers from the NCLB

repukes compromised with Dems and made some of the provisions of the PATRIOT Act expire.

Last night, repukes compromised with Dems on the budget omnibus bill and eliminated funding for the presidential yacht, and they promised to hold a seperate vote on the abortion clause (repukes want to allow fed funded health care orgs to be able to not pay for abortions) which means that if the repukes want to do this, they will have to go on record for it, instead of being able to say that they only voted on it because we needed to get the budget passed

I would also add that you don't seem very interested in compromise either.

[ulysses]

77. why, sangh0! what a surprise!

bush* compromised with Kennedy and approved the elimination of school vouchers from the NCLB

Think vouchers have gone away? Think again.

repukes compromised with Dems and made some of the provisions of the PATRIOT Act expire.

That must have been Bush's "compassionate conservatism" bubbling up. He gets to look reasonable for a while.

Last night, repukes compromised with Dems on the budget omnibus bill and eliminated funding for the presidential yacht, and they promised to hold a seperate vote on the abortion clause (repukes want to allow fed funded health care orgs to be able to not pay for abortions) which means that if the repukes want to do this, they will have to go on record for it, instead of being able to say that they only voted on it because we needed to get the budget passed

Yay! We killed the yacht! And I'd say Bush compromised more with the female vote than with Dems, many of whom were ready to sign the omnibus bill and get out of Dodge.

I would also add that you don't seem very interested in compromise either.

I'm not, with neoconservatives. I'll consider it with sane Republicans, and I've actively tried to generate discussion on DU for several years about progressive/moderate/centrist compromise. It's only been the progressives that have shown up for the most part.

[sangh0]

81. You switched you argument

Think vouchers have gone away? Think again.

You said the repukes aren't interested in compromise, and my recitation of the facts proves you were wrong to say that. Since you can't admit you were wrong, you try to change the argument from "Do repukes compromise?" to "Do the repukes give up?"

The dems haven't given up their opposition to vouchers either.

That must have been Bush's "compassionate conservatism" bubbling up. He gets to look reasonable for a while.

And again, bush* did compromise, which contradicts your assertion that repukes aren't interested in compromise. Instead of acknowledging your mistake, you try to change the argument from "Do repukes compromise?" to "Do the repukes give an honest reason for compromise?"

Yay! We killed the yacht! And I'd say Bush compromised more with the female vote than with Dems, many of whom were ready to sign the omnibus bill and get out of Dodge.

And here you ADMIT that repukes DO compromise, but don't acknowledge your mistake in saying that repukes DON'T compromise.

[ulysses]

82. let's look at Republican "compromise".

Propose an education bill that is bad on many fronts, including a variety of ways to ensure that public schools already in trouble fail altogether and an education privatization provision ready to kick in when they do. Back off on that provision in order to get the rest of a bad bill through Congress. Wait for schools to begin failing the tests and reintroduce the privatization plan a few years down the road.

Maybe you call that compromise. I suspect that a number of folks in the party leadership do as well, which is a large part of the problem.

[sangh0]

83. Vouchers were a big deal for repukes to give up

bush* made vouchers one of the most important parts of his 2000 campaign (remember "Compassionate Conservative"?)

Besides, regardless of what YOU call it, it is a compromise. But you know that. You just won't admit it.

[ulysses]

85. tell me in a few years if they've given them up.

Hell, for that matter, tell me if Joe Lieberman has! :D

[sangh0]

86. Tell me when the Dems give up opposing vouchers

I suspect I'll be calling you before you call me

Hell, for that matter, tell me if Joe Lieberman has!

We're talking about moderates. :-)

[ulysses]

87. I'll do that.

We're talking about moderates.

Hey, I've heard it said. Then, dolstein hasn't dropped in yet...

[sangh0]

90. Heh

BTW, bush* also compromised by allowing Rice to testify to the 9/11 committee, by releasing the Aug 2001 PDB, and by allowing himself to be "interviewed" by the 9/11 commission.

[Zhade]

95. How can it be a compromise when he has a legal responsibility to do so?

He can't take credit for "compromising" for just doing his job.

[sangh0]

100. Because bush* was NOT legally required to do so.

and I have no idea where you got that idea.

[Zhade]

94. You're describing what I call a "legislative limited hangout".

It's very similar to, say, the limited hangout of "poor intelligence caused 9/11". The way you've described it is exactly how the modern Republican party works - throw out a REALLY bad bill, just to "compromise" to get to a bad bill. It's also reminiscent of how b*sh will say "we raised ____ (insert good social program here) by ___ dollars this year" after CUTTING it to below the new "increase" the year before.

[sangh0]

102. Call it what you want

it's still a compromise.

[ulysses]

103. not if they end up getting it anyway. n/t

[Zhade]

78. WOAH WOAH WOAH!

"Preventive wars maybe, preemptive wars never."

Are you mixing up the two terms? Iraq was actually a "preventive" war, not a "preemptive" one, since there was no gathering threat. Preventive wars are illegal under international law.

[MrModerate]

96. Damn! You're right . . .

I got my PREs twisted in a bunch:

Preemptive war to counter an imminent threat, yes
Preventive war to crush a possible future threat, no

--Sorry about that

[Zhade]

101. No worries. They've worked hard to conflate the two in people's minds.

NT!

[Padraig18]

44. 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments, plus privacy issues.

And that's just a start...

:)

[ulysses]

45. morning, Paddy.

:hi:

So, how do those get reconciled with a stance of compromise toward the GOP?

[Padraig18]

74. They don't.

I'm no advocate of compromise with the GOP.

:hi:

[ulysses]

79. well hell, man.

That makes you a bona fide member of the loony left! Your badge will arrive in the mail shortly. :D

[Padraig18]

97. Awesome!

:evilgrin:

[welshTerrier2]

49. Dem moderates and lefties are essentially the SAME

i've read most of the responses in this thread and see very few differences between moderates and lefties ... i expect some won't accept this and will cling to the joys they feel with this sibbling rivalry ... the battle they are fighting is counter-productive and illusory ...

one theme that was frequently mentioned was moderates declaring that they believe we shouldn't spend beyond our means ... the question I would ask is whether they believe far lefties think we should spend beyond our means ...

this spending argument is a republican myth ... anyone who believes in running up massive deficits isn't a leftie, they are idiots ... big deficits are just poor economic policy ...

one other theme stuck out from reading this thread ... a few people suggested that moderates were willing to be practical and work with the republicans and that lefties expected a fight on every issue ... this may be a real difference between democratic moderates and lefties ... but it is more of a political strategy than a set of core values ... it's more of a how to achieve "it" than a definition of exactly what "it" is ...

we really need to get past this left versus center squabbling ... we need to get down to a detailed definition of our core values ... I believe when we do, we'll find very little difference if any between moderates and lefties ... our greatest weakness as a party is that we have problems with defining our message, consistently and frequently communicating our message and getting more democrats to participate in the political process ... it's way past time to drop the labels and end the in-fighting ...

[ulysses]

50. I partly agree with you that it's about strategy more than values,

except that there *are* some significant differences on the center/left, and there *are* some significant instances where proposed strategy seriously affects core values. Welfare reform is the instance I keep bringing up, but there are others. School vouchers, the Guantanamo detainees.

it's way past time to drop the labels and end the in-fighting

Party centrists haven't ended it. I see no reason the left should do it unilaterally.

[welshTerrier2]

55. here's what I believe to be THE ISSUE ...

I see a country that aspires to democracy but is moving further and further away from it every day ... "one man (or woman), one vote" has been replaced by a government that is sold to the highest bidder ... foreign policy is about protecting multi-nationals from global political and market instabilities ... who do you think is spending billions to whisper in your Congressman's ear?

we are losing (or as some say "loosing") our democracy ... for me, all the other issues are "pretend" ... they are "pretend" not because they are unimportant but because we are too weak to bring about the changes we seek ... you either have a voice or you don't ...

and domestic policy? the recent Medicare debacle was written by pharmaceutical industry lobbyists ... does anyone really believe the corporate profit motive didn't define the terms of the new law? do you think HMO's might have made a buck or two when the law was passed?

both foreign and domestic policies are being written for and by corporate interests ...

this is not a left/right divide ... the average citizen has virtually no power to shape the direction of the country ... the values that average citizens hold, be they left, center or moderate, are subjugated to the will of the greediest, wealthiest and most powerful ... to have a relatively equal voice is THE ISSUE ...

with this understanding, and understanding that we are all sinking in the same little boat, there is only one battle, only one issue ... viewing the world through the very narrow but exacting lens of a loss of democracy, we are all brothers and sisters in the same struggle ... to see and hear the petty bickering with so much at stake is a most distressing business ...

as an addendum, let's discuss a couple of the issues you raised ... specifically, welfare and school vouchers ... i believe our goal should be to focus on more clearly defining our views on these issues rather than battling endlessly over our perceived differences ...

on welfare, for example, if you ask: "should people on welfare get a free ride if they refuse to work when they are able to work", you will highlight differences of opinion ... frankly, i'm not sure i could articulate how those who label themselves either moderate or left would respond to this ... but the question could just as easily be asked another way; a way I suspect would lead to greater unity ... suppose we asked: "should a person on welfare be forced to return to work if they would be unable to care for young children by doing so?" ... now, i suspect, you would find a more unified response ... my view is that we need to start framing our issues in a way that promotes, rather than destroys, unity ...

and on school vouchers, many of the self-described moderates in this thread stated that one of their most important values was the separation of church and state ... is it your contention that moderates would support school vouchers to attend religious schools? the concern I have is that those who accept as gospel the left/right divide, or rather the democratic left/moderate divide, inaccurately ascribe positions to those they think oppose them ...

the bottom line is, a house divided cannot stand ... our goal should not be unity for the sake of unity ... our goal should be to lose the labels and get down to ironing out the details ... in the end, we may have disagreements ... many of these disagreements are likely to be more of degree than of direction ... our differences are small compared to the really big issues on which we all agree ...

[ulysses]

57. ok.

for me, all the other issues are "pretend" ... they are "pretend" not because they are unimportant but because we are too weak to bring about the changes we seek ... you either have a voice or you don't ...


But we're not going to gain a stronger voice by continuing to roll over and wait for the Republicans to play nice.

both foreign and domestic policies are being written for and by corporate interests ...

Absolutely.

this is not a left/right divide ... the average citizen has virtually no power to shape the direction of the country ... the values that average citizens hold, be they left, center or moderate, are subjugated to the will of the greediest, wealthiest and most powerful ... to have a relatively equal voice is THE ISSUE ...

Which is why we need to have a party that helps to provide that voice, no?

is it your contention that moderates would support school vouchers to attend religious schools?

I don't know. There are some in the party who support vouchers, and I doubt many of them are on the left.

Sorry for the abbreviated response, but I'm leaving the house shortly.

[welshTerrier2]

58. "continuing to roll over"

well, now you're talking my language ...

the democrats, elected democrats that is, need to fight on each and every issue ... if they don't, and they start with all that gibberish about "we are all Americans", the party's activist base will be gone and it will be difficult to re-energize it any time soon ...

and don't for one minute think the activist base means only the left wing ... in this election, we were unified as never before ... moderates and lefties stood together to fight the fight ...

with all my talk of unity, i'll tell you that i have not decided whether to remain a democrat ... i need to align my efforts with those who share a common view of the struggle ... this does not mean that i will not vote for democrats ... until third parties are able to offer viable candidates, i.e. candidates with a realistic chance of winning, I will continue to vote with the democrats ... so my work may go to third parties to fight for both issues and state and local candidates ... but my presidential vote will remain with the democrats for now ...

i hope that democrats do get the message ... i hope they understand that they need a better and clearer message and that the laundry list of policies needs to support the "master themes" ... i hope they understand that comprising with the neo-con agenda is never an option ... i hope they come to understand that they need a media presence everyday and the party's themes need to be repeated over and over and over ... they need to understand that you do not have to "pick your battles"; there is only one battle !! if the democrats want to join the fight, and they damned well better do it soon, i'm with them all they way ...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. I Am Willing To Work With Middle Of The Roaders In A Common Front Against

Against The Right

Some folks are saying to go to the center...

Some foks are saying to go to left...

Some folks are saying to stay where we are at....

And some folks are saying labels are useless but this avoids the problem and doesn't remedy it...


IMHO, the best strategy to isolate the right is not to move to the right but to co opt the moderates in a united front against the right.....


Choice and gay rights come immediately to mind but you can do this exercise for a host of issues...

The right is against any kind of recognition for gay couples and want to recriminalize sodomy... Yep, look at the polls.... About 35% -40% of Americans think Lawrence v Texas was wrongly decided...
How anybody in the twenty first century could think they should put Joey in the hooskow because he schtupped Frankie is beyond me....

Moderates tolerate homosexuality and believe it is not to be encourage or discouraged but tolerated...They believe folks are born that way as long as it's other folks... They support civil unions and tolerance.... They think gay bashing is so de classe....

Liberals believe love knows no bounds and support marriage for anyone in love who wants to make their union permanent..

On abortion the right opposes abortion in most if not all cases...


Moderates support most abortions but oppose partial term abortions and support some restrictions such as parental notification... As a Florid voter I voted against the parental notification measure on the ballot.....

Liberals support abortions in most cases...


I am hard core liberterian on social issues and center-left on economic issues but I am willing to find common ground with my moderate brothers and sisters in a common front against the right....

[Zhade]

80. Good post, with one caveat:

"Liberals support abortions in most cases..."

No. They support CHOICE. The rightwing frames it as supporting abortion. Please don't support their misleading framing.

[sangh0]

84. Way to go, Zhade!!!

That is SO true.

We need to take back the language from the people who can't even speak it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

93. I See Your Point...

Thank you for pointing that out...

[Renew Deal]

51. I think I'm liberal, some would say moderate.

I believe that we should pay our bills. We must balance the budget at all costs.

We must also provide health care and prescription drugs to all citizens ASAP. I can't believe that I live in a country where when I go to a doctor, the first thing they ask for is an insurance card.
Medicare needs to be dissolved in a way for health care for all.

I believe in Social Security. I think it needs to be strengthened by change. It should not be privatized.

I believe in a very powerful military. We should be the best, and best equipped.

I believe that we need to help students acheive their goals. There need to be controls on the costs of colleges. If not controls, changes made so college is available to all.

There are others, but I have to go.

[stray cat]

56. Multiple things

1. Fiscal responsibility

2. Power to the people and not to corporate interests

3. Honesty and integrity - this includes speaking hard truths instead of taking the politically expedient way out.

4. Militarily strong but wise about our use of it. In other words I don't belive in peace at any price like Chamberlain in World War II.

[leyton]

60. I draw the line at torture. Abu Graihb sickens me.

After that I vote on fiscal responsibility.

[ScreamingMeemie]

61. Here's the thing. I think I was kicked out of the moderate group this

week, although I still consider myself a moderate. Gays and Lesbians deserve the same rights as the rest of us. They are draftable and taxable, therefore they should benefit from the same rights the rest of us, I am a civil union wife, have. My daughter has the right to make a decision with regard to her own body, no matter what I personally (I think abortion is morally wrong, but not legislatable) think. Plain and simple...no backing down.

[thinksmart]

62. old article from democracy for america

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/features/2004/11/08/democrats_cannot_give_up.php

[Pushed To The Left]

64. Liberals and moderates need to stick together

right now! Honestly, I might be considered moderate for a DUer, though I think I'm pretty liberal. I'm probably about 90% liberal and 10% conservative. Whether that makes me moderate or liberal, I'm really not sure. But we all have the same goal: Defeating the right-wing!! Anybody who isn't on the far right is considered liberal these days anyway. Non-right-wingers need to unite!

[geek tragedy]

98. Domestically, fiscal responsibility, personal freedom, and redistribution

of wealth sufficient to guarantee every person the opportunity to be healthy and get an education.

Foreign policy-wise, advancing US interests and values through diplomacy and ideas. Avoid unnecessary wars like Iraq but conduct necessary wars such as that in Afghanistan with complete ferocity. Conducting a smarter war on terror that destroys terrorist organizations through the best means available--law enforcement and intelligence, with military force used only where appropriate.