Moderation in All Things...including moderation.

[Mythsaje]

I have long considered myself a "moderate," or a perhaps a "centrist." Some people might find that amazing, considering how much of an economic populist I am. But I don't find the notions all that contradictory. I find myself opposing much of the so-called "conservative" agenda because the policies they've pursued in general have been highly destructive and very short-sighted. But I'm not one to believe in sudden, radical changes. Another reason I oppose these bastards is because they're not really conservative at all, but reactionary. Radical. They hang the label of "conservative" on themselves, but they're not really trying to conserve anything, but strip away some of the best things America has achieved in the last hundred years or so.

I do not cry for the destruction of corporate America, but I do call out for its reconstruction. It needs desperately to be reined in, not allowed to run amuck like a pack of semi-feral dogs allowed to ravage the countryside at will.

This isn't radical. It's not even unprecedented. It actually harkens back to the days of Teddy Roosevelt's trust-busting, and FDR's New Deal. It's about returning America back into the hands of the people, not the monied interests that have seized the reins from us and are refusing to give them back.

To me, "moderate" doesn't mean "okay with the status quo." It means willing and able to explore positive, well-considered changes that will lead to a better future for everyone. It means a thoughtful approach to progressive ideas, and the pursuit of policy objectives that will gradually and thoughtfully give us a better world in which to raise our children and our children's children.

It doesn't mean allowing the corporations and the corporate-friendly politicians the leeway to continue the same destructive, self-serving policies that have put us in such dire economic and environmental straits.

[fasttense]

1. Ah, you are singing my song.

There are few constants in life that you can count on, but one of those is all things in moderation.

Capitalism in moderation is good, taken to extremes capitalism can destroy a nation. Look at Pinochet's Chile for an example of that. Socialism in moderation is good, taken to extremes socialism can also destroy a nation, look at the USSR.

If you want to know what to do, always choose the moderate path. The Con-servatives are such radical right wing neocons they can't see that today's progressive and liberals are now the moderates. Liberals and progressive have now moved over to the moderate side because of the vacuum created by the Con-servative's move to the radical right.

I use to not worry if we elected a republican because I thought we could at least count on fiscal and moral conservation. But today's radical right wing neocon has no restraint when spending, or squandering, our nation's wealth. Today's radical right wing neocon has also lost their moral conservatism. Republicans of the past, would never have allowed for the bribes, lies and sexual scandals of today's radicals.

If Americans have learned anything from these horrible, horrible years of the bushes, I hope it is that extremes are very dangerous both to individuals and to nations.

[Echo In Light]

2. Realistically most people, irrespective of social conditioning, would hold...

Contradictory views which another could label either liberal or conservative. My personal disdain for "moderates" of the leaning-to-the-kinda-left variety is that they are often people who don't have a comprehensive understanding of how authoritarian/theocratic/machismo/pro-corporate right wingers have gradually shifted the entire country to the right over the past three decades, largely through media consolidation {the vehicle for getting the 'right' messages drilled into people's minds 24/7}, which has crossed over into the central themes of much of the corporate culture's pastimes. Right wing traits and "values" have become so deeply ingrained within the cultural fabric that people simply don't see it because they fail to understand it. From there, it's my experience that it's usually a "moderate" who is quick to dismiss these facts by labeling those who address these issues as "conspiracy theorists." ...a right wing tool used to dissuade others from engaging in objective, institutional analysis, as doing so would yield negative results for those who seek to keep everything shifted to the right. Hence the current state of mainline media...

[annabanana]

3. You are right, of course. Conserve is NOT what this crowd does.

They turned a political philosophy into a slogan. . Then turned the slogan into a "moral stance".

i.e. "Conservative" = all that is good
"Liberal" = all that is evil

And the owners of the media were more than happy to go along.

[Echo In Light]

4. The MSM has NEVER been "liberal" in the U.S.

Birds of a feather. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. As Chomsky points out, often after a large scandal the press is able to get more stories reported on that editors would normally not allow for. The window opens but closes again quickly. The behind the scenes consolidation and "deregulation" is what allowed for a more closely unified, corporate view of reality being sold to the world...especially America, whose democracy is closely managed.

[Perry Logan]

5. When they have stolen your vote, they have made you a slave. These are radical times.