Posted on 08/03/2002 9:32:33 AM PDT by forest
For some reason, most in today's liberal corporate media like to refer to liberal politicians as "moderate" or "centrists." That's the media's way, evidently, of softening the blow of their discussions of unconstitutional proposals. It is also usually an obvious lie.
For instance, during his first presidential campaign, the media informed Americans that Bill Clinton was a moderate Democrat. Even after the Clinton administration tried to socialize the whole of the American medical delivery system, the media still referred to him as a moderate, rather than the socialist he is.
My unanswered question to a media honcho was simple: "Moderate as to who, Nikita Khrushchev or Mikhail Gorbachev maybe? What is the criteria for defining a person as a moderate?" The reply was but a blank stare. They had no idea; it was just a tag they liked to use. Which means, It is little more than perpetual socialist propaganda from a meddlesome media.
Moderate is defined as "being within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme." If our Constitution is our standard of government -- the political center -- "moderate" certainly did not define anyone in the Clinton administration. They were extremely left. Socialists. Control freaks, too.
Centrist is defined as "one who takes a position in the political center; a moderate." So we see, moderate and centrist could be synonyms and so could sometimes be used interchangeably.
In the center of our political spectrum we find our standard: The Constitution as defined by the Founding Fathers. Anyone not adhering to the original intent of the Founding Fathers, therefore, should not be called a "moderate" or a "centrist." Rather, they would be either on the right or left of the political spectrum -- which is where we find 99% of today's federal politicians and bureaucrats.
Those on the left of the political spectrum -- all of the Democrats and many Republicans -- tend to support big government control of just about everything. That is, they sponsor programs to redistribute the wealth, legislate equality even when it is physically impossible, attempt to regulate everything in life through federal law and regulation, and attempt to control the population through a leviathan of very restrictive taxes, social programs and mandates.
Those on the right tend to believe that government should control the morality of the nation and that strict laws are necessary to make people behave as ordered.
There are position overlaps between the far right and far left, of course. Actually, sometimes it seems as though the political spectrum is like a circle, analogous to a clock. And, if twelve o'clock is designated as our center starting point -- the original intent of the Founding Fathers -- some in Congress are so far afield to the right or the left that they are bumping into each other down around 6 o'clock. Consequently, lately they often join together and propose some of the most Constitutionally repugnant bills this country has ever seen.
The avalanche of obnoxious gun bills come immediately to mind. So do the tobacco and campaign finance bills. Even worse yet is FEMA's scheming to take over the country in any type of real or contrived emergency and Congress readying to authorize martial law because the federal officials were either too stupid or too negligent to protect our borders against terrorists and a constant onslaught of illegal aliens.
Some people have started using the term "Republicrat" as a tag for those legislators who totally disregard the Constitution. But, while there may be a lot of truth to that, it does not quite fit the bill, so to speak. We need a term that accurately defines these Members of Congress who propose bills that drastically violate our Constitution and subjugate our Liberty.
What shall we call those who so blatantly disobey our Constitution with nearly every piece of legislation or regulation they propose -- and, at the same time, tag those of us who call for a Constitutional form of government right-wing reactionaries? What's the direct opposite of a centrist?
I leave that for the readers to discuss. However, a descriptive tag is necessary. And, like "centrist" and "moderate," it should be simple and easy to remember.
There are position overlaps between the far right and far left, of course. Actually, sometimes it seems as though the political spectrum is like a circle, analogous to a clock. And, if twelve o'clock is designated as our center starting point -- the original intent of the Founding Fathers -- some in Congress are so far afield to the right or the left that they are bumping into each other down around 6 o'clock. Consequently, lately they often join together and propose some of the most Constitutionally repugnant bills this country has ever seen.
What shall we call those who so blatantly disobey our Constitution with nearly every piece of legislation or regulation they propose? What's the direct opposite of a centrist?
Centropposite? 8<) But that is not simple. Simple minded to fit, maybe, but not simple. You name.
How about CINO - Centrist In Name Only...But I still think limosine liberal fits the best here.
Why, an extremist, of course!
No objection, but I would call them International socialists.
You're probably right on the merits of the issue, but my phrase is meant to educate people, who may begin to associate the Democrats with the Nazis, and vice versa. Some people think the comparison is invalid, and say so, which allows me to give them the (usually unused) opportunity to show me the error of my ways. With other people, it seems to slip under their mental radar, and this leads me to believe it may eventually become a permanent part of their viewpoint, almost without their noticing.
Agreed. I recently made the comparison in a conversation with a lib/dem/newyorker, who absolutey refused to accept the fact that Hitler was a socialist (socialists can't possibly be evil..). National Socialist German Workers Party is simply dismissed out of hand as 'an unrepresentative name'. The systematic redistribution of wealth (from Jews to Aryans) "wasn't really socialism"; Gun control: "just a coincidence"!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.