Note: Mr. Goldsworth says that I'm a typical moderate for various reasons. Mr. Goldworth is a typical reactionary in my view.
Just like a typical "moderate". Wrap oneself up in various banners, namely "centrism" and accuse your opponents of "extremism" by using the most cartoonish and extreme language available. It would seem to me that if one were truly "moderate", then one would find places of agreement. If one were truly "moderate", then as a "moderate" you couldn't have the moral fiber to tell your fellow "moderates" to kick conservatives out of the party. That last line especially is unmoderate in language and tone, don't you think?
Look, if you don't have the stomach to fight liberalism where it is, then fine, call yourself a liberal Republican and parade online in all of your splendor and glory. Perhaps I should read on, but where are the crackbacks on liberals within the party? Where is the affirmation of traditional morality and traditional marriage between a man and a woman? Where is the plan for VICTORY over liberals?
Why should I as a conservative settle for detente and compromise when they refuse to do the same for us? Why is it you "moderates" can heap criticism upon your conservative brothers and sisters, but can't rouse yourselves to even complain about what liberals do? It would be far more productive and refreshing to see some crackbacks on liberals and praising of conservatives.
Here's some suggestions to get one and all started: 1. the contemporary definition of racism is prejudice + power = racism. This definition by its very nature makes racism an unfair one-way street.
2. Contemporary feminism debases women into acting like men and thus weakens their natural strengths. Contemporary feminists, in order to achieve their goals would force women to work outside of the home and have sexual habits mimicking men's.
3. The state will teach only what is in its own self interest. The state's interests are in ignorant, sheepish workers, not daring self-thinking entreprenuers.
I hope I have stirred the pot for one and all and caused you "moderates" to stop and think about some of your own assumptions about the body politic.
Steve
Here's a metaphor for Mr. Goldsworth and everyone else out there on the radical wings, whether left or right.
---------------------
It is appropriate that in our political lingo we use terms such as "right-wing" and "left-wing" - such terms remind me of our country's majestic national bird, the Bald Eagle.
To fly properly, the eagle must rely on the propulsion of both wings. It cannot fly if one wing is damaged, or clipped, or simply taken out of existence. It cannot fly properly if one wing is dominant and the other weak - that makes the bird spiral, rather than fly straight and true.
Nor can the eagle do without both wings entirely. If so, that vast middle of the eagle is grounded and moves slowly, if at all.
But again, the middle is ultimately what determines the direction the eagle flies, because that middle holds the brains, the heart, and everything else the eagle needs to live. Sometimes the middle needs a pull from the left wing, sometimes a pull from the right. But never should it pull only in one direction.
Used properly, the wings propel the body to great heights and at great speeds. Used improperly, they threaten to ground the body altogether.
Posted by: Mark Kittel at June 10, 2004 12:46 PMhang around Mr. Goldsworth - and bring friends. You truely are welcome here even if some of disagree with you.
"Where is the plan for VICTORY over liberals?"
Liberals are Americans - some are Republicans - Why do you hate them so much that you feel compelled to wage war?
"It would be far more productive and refreshing to see some crackbacks on liberals and praising of conservatives."
I'm not on a jihad against Liberals. I am concerned about the direction the of the country. And I'm concerned about blind adherence to ideology of any stripe. I am concerned with balance and the appropriateness of policy.
And frankly, I am sick of the culture war - the 60's and 70's are done and over with - it's time to move on.
Wingnuts are wingnuts - I don't see the value in classifying them by ideology, religion or nationality. In any case, it's the wingnut policy that needs critism not the individuals advancing the policy.
"Contemporary feminism debases women into acting like men and thus weakens their natural strengths."
I'll leave that to women to figure out.
"The state will teach only what is in its own self interest. The state's interests are in ignorant, sheepish workers, not daring self-thinking entreprenuers."
How can you love this country and yet despise its government?
Posted by: dorsano at June 7, 2004 08:39 PMDennis,
I started writing a reply to Goldsworth, but it got lost somehow in the system.
I am always amazed by people who adopt the attitude "They won't do it for us, why should we do it for them?"
I always quote Bush's favorite "philosopher" when that comes up: "Do unto others as you would have them do to you."
I think most people prefer to hear and follow, "Do unto others as they have done to you."
Posted by: Mark Kittel at June 7, 2004 09:58 AM