Stewart has the right idea -- moderation, reasonableness. It's all about striking the right tone. Some people want to teach our children that impersonal, natural forces are responsible for the origin of species. Most Americans actually believe in divine Creator, not unlike the one mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, in the pledge, the one we trust on our money. So why not teach both and let everyone decide for themselves? Recall Clinton's willingness to compromise and how Republicans welcomed him with open arms. We had to impeach him for using faulty evidence to start that expensive war over there in the Middle East, but otherwise we got along fine.
Your post seems a kind of weird to me. You start off with a reasonable proposition--that Stewart's position of moderation is a desired trait.
Then you veer off into implying that Creationism ought to be taught alongside Natural Selection in our Secular Public schools (I doubt they teach Natural Selection alongside Creationism in Sunday School).
Then another topic change about Clinton's willingness to compromise and the false notion that Republicans welcomed him.
And then you claim that the impeachment of Clinton was because he started...Oh Wait....sorry.....I get it now....
you're being Sarcastic.
Not in the post I was responding to.
It was mainly "blue dogs" and Democrats whose seats were at risk in their district.
Actually Skeptic Ginger DID make the distinction in that post between Legislators and the Political Base.
SG made the further distinction that it was the Senate Democrats who tried to appease the Party of No.
I see that we agree that Blue Dogs derailed the Health Bill. But again, had Obama started with National Single Payer we could have ended up with a Public Option, which would have at least made the Individual Mandate tenable. As it stands, all we have is a mild Insurance Reform Bill that gives Private Insurance a windfall by forcing people to buy their Lemon Products.
Indeed. Not a shocking result considering corporations have never had a problem funding the Dems' election bids.But to the partisan mind it's all the fault of those meddling Republicans. And the Democrats never did anything wrong except maybe by being too fair and decent to the GOP and other tactical mistakes. Certainly no less than noble intentions among that crowd, though.
But what makes them "extreme right"?
So irrational hatred of Obama is to be considered an extreme right wing political position? I think this just goes to show how meaningless the so called left/right axis can be.
Okay, let's break this down then shall we!?
It's quite true that Class-warfare from the Top-Down is the name of the game. And it's very true that Corporatists have bought both parties--though the Democrats to a lesser degree because there is a contingent of Actual Progressives in the Democratic Party.
Corporate Capitalism is a Right Wing ideological system of political/economy. The Corporatists stir up their pseudo-populist base with disinformation and bogus Conspiracy Theories (Birther/Secret Socialist Muslim Obama/Mexicans are coming to get us/the UN is coming to get us/Illuminati/Jews etc etc).
The Right Wing Base likes to believe they are Populist, but their Cultural Conservative Views leaves them vulnerable to believing all the False Conspiracy garbage. And their Cultural Conservatism means that their "Populism" only extends to their White Protestant Selves. Gays, Feminists, Environmentalists, African Americans, Hispanics, etc etc need not apply. Hence they are pseudo-populists.
And yes, in the past there have been Moderate Conservatives and Republican Legislators who bucked the trend. But now the party is being purged and the confluence of the Corporate and Cultural Right are circling the Wagons, and spouting "Extremist" rhetoric, backed up with Extremist Violence and threats of violence.
Left on the outside is anyone to the Left of Richard Nixon.
Insofar as many Democratic legislators are beholden to those very same Corporate Interests they are compromised. This includes Centrist "Moderate" Pro-Corporate Democrats like Obama. So, YES, irrational hatred of Obama IS an Extreme Right Position.
Not sure what you mean by "political violence".
At home in the US it means, firebombing clinics where abortions are performed, assassinating doctors who perform abortions, posting addresses of Abortion Doctors, Liberal Politicians, and Left Activists on the internet with the intent of fomenting violence against them, Anthrax scares and attcks against Liberal Politicians, committing arson on Islamic centers and Black Churches, threatening "second amendment solutions," curb stomping Left Activists, Right Wing Pundits screaming about how all liberals are the Socialist enemy and using violent rhetoric...and on and on.
It also means that National and Local Police forces carry out violent acts against activists of all stripes.
Abroad it means CIA backed Coups against democratically elected leaders, CIA backed Death Squads that target Labour activists, Indigenous Activists, Nuns, illegal wars of aggression against regimes that aren't compliant enough to corporate interests...etc etc.
That's all Political Violence.
On the "other side" Keith Olbermann is about as left as it gets in Pundit land. But aside from some occasional hyperbole you don't hear Left/liberal pundits fomenting violence.
Left and Liberal activists PROTEST political violence at home and State sponsored Terrorism abroad. Left and Liberal activists advocate for the poor, Gays, the oppressed, women's rights, minority ethnic groups' rights, against Corporate destruction of the Environment, against the pillaging of Public Funds by Corporations through tax-breaks and subsidies, against outsourcing of jobs, they advocate for spending Public Funds on Public services....etc.
Sometimes Liberals and Leftists have mass protests against illegal wars and against Corporate Exploitation of the labour and resources around the Globe. Then when Police start Rioting against Left/Liberal protesters the ensuing melees are blamed on "Extreme Leftists." Then Left and Liberal protesters are arrested, herded into pens, tear-gassed and beaten.
Where were those same police forces when Gun Nuts showed up Armed to "protest" at health care rallies? Palling around with them for the most part. No arrests. One dude gets detained and released a few hours later at a rally that Obama attended.
Some Left activists (including Clergy members) do occasionally vandalize the property of Weapons Manufacturers, some do spray-paint property of Corporations, some do throw red paint on people wearing fur coats and let animals out of cages, some do sabotage property of clear-cutters.
There haven't been any Left political groups in the US that advocate ACTUAL violence against people since the Weather Underground--a group that had been infiltrated by COINTELPRO Provocateurs I might add.
Somehow I have a hard time equating the Violent Rhetoric and the Violent Actions of the Right with Left and Liberal Protesters.
When a few Leftists say Bush is like Hitler they have real War-Crimes to back up their rhetoric. When Rightists call Obama Hitler, they aren't castigating him for continuing Bush's illegal wars, they are making false comparisons between spending Public Money on Public Services and Hitler's agenda.
So excuse me if I agree with Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, and Skeptic Ginger that Jon Stewart's Rally for Sanity--on both sides--was an engagement in False Equivocation.
GB
