Wow, do we moderates even deserve to live?

[RB TexLa]

[bryant69]

1. It depends on what you mean by moderate

If you mean sell out - like Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman - well, than yeah we wouldn't dserve much.

On the other hand if you are talking about a set of beliefs about what Government should and should not do - well, bear up. As they say, don't let the bastards grind you down.

You have to realize that DU Progressives are just fighting for what they believe - if that means they have to crap on moderates, well, that's the way the game is played.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

10. No reasonable person would consider those two moderates.

Ben and Bill Nelson are moderates - guys who walk the line between conservatives and liberals, and do it without sabotaging their own party. There's a wide difference between the two.

Some "DU Progressives" are not progressives nearly as much as they are zealots. And they do not play the game properly. Last I checked, the game dictates that 51 Senators and 218 Congressmen give a party the majority, and we're never going to reach those figures without moderates. The "game" those zealots play is nothing more than pure ignorance, and quite frankly, a form of hatred.

[WI_DEM]

15. Zell Miller is not a moderate--Lieberman might be because of his

liberal domestic voting record, but his views on foreign policy put him way over in the hawk/Bush category.

[FILAM23]

51. I consider myself a moderate,

and I have defenite opinions on almost every issue.
Some of my opinions are liberal some are conservative.
So I define a moderate as some one who doesn't just follow the
party line on every issue.

[sendero]

55. If that's a moderate...

... color me moderate.

[Atman]

2. NO ONE "deserves" to live!

You must EARN that right, through blind allegiance to political extremists!

[Selatius]

3. Define "moderate" n/t

[RB TexLa]

4. I'll let the person determining if others deserve to live determine the

definition as well.

[Double T]

5. You will be allowed to live as long as you stay..........

left of center. But cross the line just once and.........

[JeffR]

6. Sure ya do

Just try to get with the program, would ya?:evilgrin:

[Dhalgren]

7. When faced with fascism, a "moderate" is an enabler.

A "moderate" is viewed by the fascist as a whore and is used as such.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. By your very own definition,

are you not also a fascist?

[Dhalgren]

13. No. Are you?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. You called the moderate an "enabler".

How is that anything other than a nicer way of calling a moderate a "whore"?

[Dhalgren]

24. I said that the fascist uses the moderate as a whore. I don't use

them for anything. I said that to the fascist the moderate IS a whore, not that the fascist would "call" them such. No, the fascist will only have good things to say about the moderate "opposition". The moderate is not the enemy of the fascist - the fascist would like nothing better than if all of his/her "enemies" were moderates. Confronting fascism with moderation is like fighting fire with kindling. Perhaps my definition of "moderate" is not the same as yours or we are using the term in differing connotations. Or, perhaps, you think that calling the Bushists a nascent fascist movement is "over the top", but to paraphrase Goldwater, "Moderation in fighting fascism is no vertue"...

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

27. I do find the Bushists to be fascist, no doubt about it.

However, just because they might like the moderate at times, that doesn't mean for a minute they like them. See how they treat Arlen Specter? See how they treat Lincoln Chafee? They tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to unseat moderates Bill and Ben Nelson. The moderate IS the enemy of the fascist. Everyone except the fascists are the enemies of the fascist. That is where you are entirely mistaken, and that's very odd because that's practically the definition of fascism.

And your calling them an "enabler" is very interesting as well. Do you not realize that these moderates will enable us to take back the majority if we win 5 Senate seats in November?

[Dhalgren]

33. We'll have to wait till November to see how that goes. And a

"moderate" in their own party is not the "opposition". Of course they don't like moderates in their own party. Why? Because moderates in their own party are dead weight and a hindrance. Moderates in their own party are not equal to moderates in a supposed "opposition".

I hope that a large portion of "moderate" Republicans either sit-out or vote Democratic in November, but I won't hold my breath.

Do I expect and want the moderate Democrats to vote against the Bushists in November? Of course, but I still see moderation in combating the fascists as a losing position.

This is one more area where the two of us will just disagree.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

36. You just contradicted yourself.

Your words: I said that the fascist uses the moderate as a whore. I don't use them for anything.

Your words: Do I expect and want the moderate Democrats to vote against the Bushists in November? Of course, but I still see moderation in combating the fascists as a losing position.



Are you not using them for their vote? Are you not using them as a whore? As per your definition then, are you not also a fascist?

[Dhalgren]

46. When a person votes for what is best for their country, I do not

consider that being used by me - or anyone else. Are you saying that?

The "use" that the fascists put the moderates to, is the "use" of non-confrontation. If the "moderate" votes for the Dictator, or in a way that facilitates him, then they are not voting for their country's best interests.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

54. But you're unilaterally deciding what's best for our country.

Not everyone shares your vision for what is best, and their opinions are just as valid as yours. Demanding that moderates vote as your would is using them.

[Dhalgren]

56. If a person believes that the fascists are best for the country,

then he/she is not (at least by my definition) a "moderate". If you say that a "moderate" can support Bush, then we are not using the same definitions. My definition of a "moderate Democrat" (in these times) is one who, of course, opposes the Bush Regime, but that either does not think that the Bush Regime is fascist and therefore need not deal with the Regime as such; or thinks that fascists can be dealt with and worked with in the normal political ways.

Many "moderates" in the Democratic Party actually support the Iraqi Occupation, but view its execution as inept or wrong-headed. They view many of the Republican-passed social legislation as basically ok, and "workable". Some even support the tax cuts for the rich, and don't seem to have too big of a problem with the continually growing national debt. Now, they can "say" that they have "concerns" about these issues, but they so often side with the Dictator on the various pieces of legislation, appointments, and policies that it is hard to give their protestations credence. These folks, in normal times (whatever that may be), would not be called "moderates". Again, just my opinion...

[OregonDem]

47. Isn't a moderate by definition opposed to extremes?

So how would they be enablers to fascism?

[OregonDem]

48. s/d

[Dhalgren]

53. By not fighting the fascists and trying to "work" with them...

[TechBear_Seattle]

8. If you are not a liberal then you are with the terrorists

You moderate fence-sitter, you. :hi:

[hogwyld]

9. So does that mean

You are either with the commie libruls, or you are a neocon?

[TechBear_Seattle]

19. You are either with the true American patriots, or you are a neocon

Framing, my friend. It is all in the framing.

[cyclezealot]

12. dont allow yourself to be labeled.

I say calling yourself a moderate, just means you don't have the time to study issues or are afraid to take a stand.
Like Hightower says. Only thing in the middle of the road are dead armadillos.
Look at issues individually and take a stand. Someone says you always have to take a middle of the road position, means you are letting someone dictate what is on both ends and therefore I have to not go either way. Ask who is defining centerist and find out yourself if that is where my interests are.
I voted, maybe you don't deserve anything else. Your opinions are being dictated to you; so therefore maybe your actions harm us all.

[zanne]

16. I don't think anybody is a "moderate".

The word is deceiving; it leads us to think that you're "moderate" in all issues, but you aren't. In political speech, "moderate" now means that you lean left on some things and you lean right on others. That's not "moderate". I don't know what it is, but not moderate.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. Bullshit.

Being a moderate doesn't mean you don't have a stance on the issue - it just means that you don't always fall along the same lines. In fact, it'd be far closer to the truth to say that a true moderate (and not one that merely follows the latest polls) studies the issues in far greater detail and with a far higher sense of morality than one that always finds himself on one side of the aisle.

Quite frankly, I don't even consider myself a moderate and your comments are still highly offensive and ignorant.

[cyclezealot]

22. See I touched a nerve.

I stick by Hightower's 'dead armadillo comment.' To say one is a liberal , conservative or moderate is letting others define oneself. On any given issue, the correct solution is not necessarily pre-determined. When All said and done, it's whose interest you align yourself with. And to what group your interests are aligned. Because we all are members of some sub-group.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

23. Your logic is flawless.

:sarcasm:

[cyclezealot]

25. Even tho others would categorize me

I find labels counterproductive. I hate label makers. It's how the spin doctors know how to control us.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

29. Labels are labels.

Labels don't control your beliefs, nor do they control how you vote. Furthermore, there is absolutely, positively no getting around the fact that labels are never going away, so you'd best get used to it.

Furthermore, I don't see how your hatred for labels has anything to do with the concept that being a moderate is a bad thing. These seem to be mutually exclusive notions.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. I hate to break it to you,

but labels are the only thing that make communication possible.

All words are is an attempt to label things. The more & more accurately we label things, the more effectively we can discuss them. Labelling is good.

[Selatius]

57. That depends on how you label things

If you label things in order to set up mental guideposts and markers, that's one thing. On the other hand, if you are labeling things with the objective of either trying to discredit or marginalize that which you are labeling, then that's a different issue.

[captcorajus]

26. Are you kidding me?

The whole problem right now is polarization. The whole, "you are either with us or against us" is what is allowing the neo-cons to maintain their power base. If these election weren't almost split down the middle, they couldn't throw them like they have.

Here are some examples of moderate views:
- I believe in a woman's right to choose, but I also don't think abortion should be used as "birth control." "right to choose" does not equate to abating responsibility for one's own actions.

- War is a last resort. One that comes about after all other methods have been exhasted and the enemy is making overt (and tangible!)threats to our security.

- Preemptive war is a prescription for endless war

- In America, while I may not agree with what you have to say, I will fight to the death your right to say it... and you don't even have to say it in some, "free speech zone."

- The is no "cost" for free speech. Otherwise, its not "free." The cost has been paid by those who came before me. There is however, a cost to defend it.

These are American ideals. They shouldn't be considered "moderate", but currently they are... and that's the real problem. Red and blue states? Are you kidding me?

Dave

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. As long as they don't tear down the party, they are fine by me.

And by tearing down the party, I don't mean with dissenting votes. I mean with the same style of pontification that each Joe Lieberman, Zell Miller, Russ Feingold, and Dennis Kucinich partake in on a daily basis. Notice that it's not only moderates that are harmful to the progressive movement.

[mainegreen]

20. Only if you mix me a drink.

I have a headache and really need a drink.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. "Moderation in principle is always a vice." Tom Paine

Full quote:

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." Tom Paine

[acmejack]

28. How Cute!

If you can remain moderate in these times I say you are without conviction. So you be cute, congratulate yourself on your cleverness, console yourself over how mean all those nasty old "zealots" are to you and buck up, someday the world will be safe for people with no real convictions-moderates-as they are called. "There's Nothing In the Middle Of the Road But Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos"-Jim Hightower

[bryant69]

30. Bullshit

DU Moderates do not lack conviction (at least not from what I've seen) - they just have a different conviction than DU Progressives.

Bryant

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

31. I argue exactly the opposite.

It's very easy to allow yourself to be herded in with one group or the other these days. I say you are completely without conviction if you are a zealot. Safety in numbers. Moderates stand alone - they are loved by neither group. It's not easy to be a moderate. You have to turn your back on pretty much everyone at some point in time. You don't have a pack of rabid followers. You just vote with your conscience and nothing more.

(Author's note: For this post, I refer to a true moderate, not one that simply makes votes that will get him/her elected. There is a huge difference.)

[acmejack]

32. I find your argument completely without merit.

To say a true progressive or liberal if you prefer is without conviction is totally off base and I am sure you know that to be true. Only a fool, which I know you are not, would make a claim to the contrary. I have been been beaten, gassed and ridiculed over the years for those views and I must admit I am surprised to be attacked here for holding them. While they were hardly popular in 1960's Texas, I suppose the more things change the more they remain the same. Moderation to me is the satisfaction with the status quo or at least maintaining a slow and cautious pace. While there may be merit in that approach, I am old my time is limited, I am frustrated and I want to see results now.

I hardly feel I display any lack of courage in the political principles I espouse. A lack of tact, admittedly. A lack of will, never.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

34. Here's the one line in your post that really bothers me:

While there may be merit in that approach, I am old my time is limited, I am frustrated and I want to see results now.

How utterly egotistical and selfish of you. This is not about you. It is not about me. It's about the future of this entire country. Every last woman, man, child, Republican, Democrat, Independent, and 3rd Party member. This isn't about what any one person wants - it's about creating a better future for all of us. What we do today is more about our children and grandchildren than it is about ourselves. If you're only in this for yourself, you are no better than the greedmongers and fascists (ie Halliburton) on the other side.

Finally, you're right - I know what I said isn't true. I only said it to illuminate the ridiculousness of your own argument.

[acmejack]

40. Selfish I may be, but to see something come from a half century of work

is hardly egotistical. I think it more of having a sense of history. Of understanding of what all those who fought and in many cases died before me, were striving for. To desire fervently to see things come to fruition in one's own lifetime is not selfish, it is setting goals. I was taught in grade school that was what we were supposed to do. I never made that million dollars or became President, so I settled upon this better world thing.

So in the end, even if I derived a small measure of satisfaction of seeing a more equitable world, a more peaceful world, just a better place in some small way and thought I had contributed to it in a meaningful way, that's all I really want. But I have, and I will continue to push hard as I can to bring that about. I know my methods are not always the best and that is where the problem is. I truly wish I knew how to be all things to all people and never rub anybody the wrong way, but I know that isn't my personality! I have a big mouth and a small brain, which is a unfortunate combination! If I had half the talent for pissing of my enemies that had for angering my allies I would have it all under control, I think.

[Radical Activist]

44. Oh come on

If there's any real media bias it is one in favor of a moderate conventional wisdom. The views of moderates are constantly reinforced and encouraged by the corporate media and the vast majority of the political establishment. There is never a time when a moderate has to daringly stand on their own unless they choose to surround themselves with the small number of liberals who are out of power.

[Kip Humphrey]

35. Only as fetuses!

[omega minimo]

38. On anniversary of Katrina/NOLA genocide this ignorant OP doesn't

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. Other:

[RB TexLa]

52. nothing to cry about, just asking if you think moderates should be

allowed to live or have their heads crushed in with baseball bats.

[w4rma]

41. This poll is funny. I support slavery for moderates.

:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm: :P

[Marr]

42. This is like the captain of the Exxon Valdez asking if he's welcome

aboard the rescue ship. Of course you are- but you can't drive it.

Sorry, Cap'n.

[Radical Activist]

43. "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion...

that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Martin Luther King
Letter from a Birmingham Jail

The same is true today of so many issues and the great stumbling block of the moderate who believes in certain principles but isn't willing to follow those principles to their logical conclusion or fully support those who are trying to make those ideals a reality.

[madmusic]

45. The average moderate leans to the right.

At least today. "Liberal" is a bad word and a bad thing to be because the Right defined it through careful propaganda over the last 30 years.

[OregonDem]

49. A person is a moderate depending on one's perspective.

I believe I would be considered a moderate to most people here on DU, but would be considered a pinko commie liberal to Freepers.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

50. Without a definition of "moderate" this is meaningless. And obviously

designed to provoke flamewars.

[maddezmom]

58. locking

flamebait