Moderate Republicans, For What They’re Worth

Most of the mainstream Republican Party presidential candidates advocate extreme positions on immigration, including mass deportations. They deny the reality of climate change science and evolution. They think torture is fine, oppose gay marriage, and remain silent about the murder of abortionists. Amid this shift to the right, some “moderate” Republicans say they’re still a legitimate voice within the party. But does it matter?

6 thoughts on “Moderate Republicans, For What They’re Worth

  1. Moderate Republicans aka RINOS. Reasonable guys like Rubio who want American jobs taken by work visas, illegal aliens, or outsourcing.

    For what it’s worth, some consider climate change ‘science,’ gay ‘marriage,’ baby murder, and letting 11 million squatters live in the US extreme.

  2. I suspect Ted’s read, “What’s the matter with Kansas” – the GOP have been playing this game for years. They run on god, guns, and gays – but when they actually get into office, they go right back to robbing from the poor to give to the rich.

    The part I find abso-freaking-lutely hilarious, is that they pounded on wedge issues so hard & for so long, that now their party faithful actually expect them to deliver. Ain’t gonna happen, but those wedges have driven deep fractures into their own party. Where before they had rock-solid solidarity, they are split into Tea Partiers, Libertarians, Gun Nuts, Millionaires and various other anti-social coteries.

    And that’s a good thing.

    • And the Dems divided into radical feminists and pinkos. But I repeat myself.

      And some might think it rather uninformed of you to call libertarians ‘anti-social’ since they base their entire worldview on opposition to that most anti-social activity–coercion.

      • «And some might think it rather uninformed of you to call libertarians ‘anti-social’ since they base their entire worldview on opposition to that most anti-social activity–coercion» – especially when that And some might think it rather uninformed of you to call libertarians ‘anti-social’ since they base their entire worldview on opposition to that most anti-social activity–coercion» not least when that purported «opposition» to coercion is mainly expressed as support for cops shooting unarmed black youths. Right on «Jack Heart» – quite the logician you are and quite the Weltanschauung you embrace ! A good libertarian, quite in the manner of the «moderate» protagonist of Ted’s cartoon above… 😉

        Henri

      • Consider the following list:

        1) Social Programs

        2) Socialized medicine

        3) Socialism

        Now, unless I miss my bet – libertarians are against the things in that list. If you are against “social” you are – by definition – antisocial

        The common root is from the Latin “socius” (companion) – which just happens to be the root of “society” as well. That comes to us from the Latin “societatem” meaning “fellowship, association, alliance, union, community” which is pretty much in direct opposition to the right wing philosophy of “Every man for himself”

        Be sure to take notes – there will be a quiz in the morning.

Leave a Reply