The Moderate Republican

As a blogger, what are your thoughts on Podcasting?Mark

I know why I keep coming back. Thanks!

Interesting... that's good info to know.

The great Republicans mentioned are now found in the history books. For many conseratives who currently own the Republican Party, this definiton borders on Communism.

Another interesting article from Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29475-2004Nov5.html

It's titled "It's the Moderates, Stupid"

I was pleased to read your piece on what constitutes a moderate Republican. I also discovered that, by definition, you no longer have a political party to which to belong

Bush is an extreme conservative, thats even scarier...

I could deal with a 'liberal' rather than a right-wing super nut gone wild.

Perhaps thats the difference. I was always an ABB, so this was the only choice I had. But when Rove & co. is behing the mudslinging, they can paint the opponent anyway they want and it will work. Flip Flop etc...

i like this blog and i often have wondered how so many "moderates" could support kerry. if you dont consider him an extreme liberal, who the hell is?

Dunno, Dennis. I suspect the possible views that fall under the "moderate Republican" banner are broader than you suggest.

An earlier posting wonders why Arnold and McCain and Giuliani supported Bush at the RNC, assuming that "this administration has done virtually nothing to support their concerns" and concluding that "To a person they are intimidated by the extremely personal and well organized attacks by members of the Bush administration’s political operation."

Well, your assumptions, and Cudahy's, are wrong. The above mentioned moderates all care deeply about the fundamental strategy of taking the war to the terrorists and those who support them, and some also care about such policies as supply side tax cuts and market oriented reforms of social security, health care, education, etc. They support Bush because they like a significant portion of his agenda, if not all.

Many moderates share the above beliefs with the social conservatives, but only part company on the Christian Right agenda (anti-gay rights, anti-stem cell research, anti-choice.)

Many Libertarians and Neo-Libertarians might also fall under the moderate Republican banner on the same grounds. Then there are conservatives like William F, Buckley, who opposed the Iraq War, and favors legalization of pot. Jack Kemp also opposed the War, and proposed tactical steps post-war that might have helped a good deal but were ignored: hold immediate local elections and give Iraqis full ownership via shares in their 200+ nationalised industries. All of these are maverick dissidents within the Republican fold who could be considered moderate in the current climate.

I think what you describe could be more accurately called a liberal Republican. Given the agenda you describe, why not be a New Democrat? Seriously, I'm curious, and I don't mean to be insulting, in case you find it so. But what is it that precludes you from being a Democrat?

What precludes me are exactly the concerns I gave above, if you are wondering. In fact, for me, being a moderate Republican is synonymous with true conservatism: a belief in moderation, an avoidance of extremism, and a respect for the principles of individual liberty on which America is founded. I fault Bush for NOT being a real conservative, for NOT having genuine principals. If you look at the Bush steel tarrifs, the pork barrel spending, the President's inability to articulate a defense of his best policy (his tax cuts) and shred Kerry's tax plan, you have to concede that this is a guy who simply does not understand free market ecomomics, and so is not really, on key fiscal questions, a conservative. Similarly, conservative respect for individual rights, concern for "getting the government off our backs" should preclude the anti-gay, anti-women's choice agenda.

Anyway, just wanted to give an alternate take on the Moderate Republican moniker.