Odd thing about Freepers..

[Green_Lantern]

They are just as convinced that they are right as everyone on DU is.

The difference is on Free Republic Obama is a "radical socialist" and on DU he's a "right-wing corporate shill".

So I'm convinced he's the most moderate President in recent history.

Moderates are kryptonite to the GOP.

[existentialist]

1. How recent is "recent?"

Irrespective, I largely agree with you.

Logically we want the right to alienate moderates with their over the top rhetoric, tactics and personal attacks.

We want to educate and persuade moderates and bring them to our way of thinking with our polite, rational, well researched and reasoned discourse.

That includes Obama among the moderates.

[Warpy]

6. The problem is that they're not moderate, no matter what

they try to call themselves. The dead center position in this country is for things like ending the wars quickly, public option health insurance, increased regulation on banks and brokerages, and fairer taxes on the wealthy and corporate. Self styled moderates are for none of these things.

This is why Democrats are demoralized. They keep being told that they're all wrong and that the center is somewhere between our conservatives and their conservatives.

If "moderates" don't wake up soon, we can give up the idea of any majority in Congress.

[Green_Lantern]

17. moderate would be truly moderate...

If we got Big Money out of politics.

The dead center position in this country is for things like ending the wars quickly, public option health insurance, increased regulation on banks and brokerages, and fairer taxes on the wealthy and corporate. Self styled moderates are for none of these things.

That's because opposing these things is what special interests want.

[pipi_k]

2. The truth often DOES lie somewhere in the middle!

no matter what anybody thinks...


:7

[Winterblues]

3. Moderates are not all that well received here either.

One thing I have noticed though is more actual LOGIC is used on this site than the one you mentioned. They are pretty much entirely emotion based with very little to none critical thinking..They can be counted on ALWAYS backing their Party no matter how abhorent or wrong it may be at the time. eg. Torture, Habeas Corpus, Race relations. People here will tear anyone apart no matter what Party if what is being offered is either bad policy or inhumane acts. eg supporting war, giving in to Insurance Giants, allowing Huge Bonuses to be paid before America gets repaid. Well Democrats do not walk in lock-step like Freepers do.

[existentialist]

4. And that's a pity.

[Winterblues]

8. Why is critical thinking pitiful?

Or is it a pity that we don't just walk in lock-step like the Freepers? :shrug: Not sure what part you find pitiful about DUers.

[existentialist]

14. What is a pity is that

because we may vilify rather than discuss politely, we may lock them into positions that we wish they didn't hold, and that they may act and vote on when we might have persuaded them to support and vote with us.

[sui generis]

9. it's definitions.

Conservatives coopted "fiscal conservative" but it's really code for "social conservative".

I think sometimes "moderates" play the same game. I'm a fiscal moderate, and a social progressive. So . . . does that make me moderate or progressive?

I really think that DU is not so much a place for social moderates (code for: don't let those pesky gays get married, but other than that we're mainstream democrats) as it might be for moderates who define themselves as fiscal moderates. Less war spending. More education, balance of trade, and practical regulation of shared resources and risks.

My OPINION is that a social moderate, as opposed to a fiscal moderate is just as dishonest as a social conservative.

[Green_Lantern]

12. social moderate could be..

A pro-gun Democrat.

[Winterblues]

13. or Anti-Abortion Democrat

Or Anti-Gay Marriage or Anti-Gay period...

[sui generis]

15. yep - my point about dishonesty

a partial truth does not the whole truth make.

[Green_Lantern]

19. what kills me

Is how attacking gay rights is usually the first approach taken to show they share "our values" yet they do nothing about our tax money bailing out Big Banks.

Which of those values really matter?

[sui generis]

21. social conservatives only have one tune

control the society around them. They really don't even typically think about fiscal matters (that's for "other people" to think about), because they place some irrational value on absolutes, like, if gays get married the world will end.

They're parasites on the backs of fiscal conservatives, borrowing on their street cred, but none of the responsibility of being fiscally conservative.

Stop the wars. You won't have to raise taxes. And fewer dead Americans. How hard is that? But oh, they'll twist their panties for the gay married terrorists instead.

[uppityperson]

27. "our values" include attacking gay rights? This is how they share "our values"?

[Green_Lantern]

28. notice the quotes....

I'm saying they think the majority of Americans hold anti-gay "values."

[uppityperson]

29. Thank you for clarifying.

Hackles back down. I find it good to ask for clarifications, thanks for doing so.

[sui generis]

5. there are more differences than just perception

The kind of people who gravitate towards freeperublic are just inferior observers. In a society where some of us have values that say to work for the greater good, to be fair and practice fairness, freepers are the kind who believe that they are inviolate in their rights to do whatever they want to the people around them. There is no balance - their idea of "radical socialism" is their response to fear of losing what little they have.

I just want to assure them: look you evil backward stunted piss poor protoplasm, we ARE compassionate about your plight. You have my WORD nobody is going to knock on your door and take your gun, nobody is going to take your fabulous trailer and give it away to the poor, or take away the change you pay for meth with and spend it on social programs for welfare queens who have 32 children and make more money being on welfare than working a real job.

Hey guys, do you ever watch mythbusters? They have something similar for politics. It's called the news.

[Green_Lantern]

10. right-wingers do appall me more...

They do often have a more loud, mean, and tough attitude. And they do seem like they'd be less sympathetic.

[sui generis]

11. some of us can be loud mean and tough too

:P

But we're more likely to be doing it for human and humane causes than out of selfishness.

[existentialist]

16. but the real question is, when we are loud and mean and tough,

and loud and mean and tough effectively, or counter productively?

[sui generis]

20. that depends who it's aimed at, and why.

The deal is, if we are hamstrung by our own decorum, then the game is over before it's been played.

I'll remind you of the figurative example of the playground bully. If you are always singled out because you won't defend yourself, it doesn't change facts. Bullies ARE. Like sharks.

If you want to swim with sharks you'd better learn how to deal with sharks and if you choose kumbaya out of some misguided set of principles, in THAT situation, just isn't a practical strategy.

Also note, not advocating that one size fits all. But if we're not willing to stand up assertively and firmly for what is RIGHT, then we ARE being counterproductive.

[existentialist]

22. Yes, I agree

There is a time to stand up and be assertive, loud, and aggressive.

And I believe we are right to criticize most of the Democratic members of Congress for not being assertive, or loud, or aggressive enough--generally.

But this is an entirely different sort of forum.

If we're not really trying to talk issues here, and to talk issues for the purpose of persuading--save when we're trying to do something immediate and practical like trying to pass or defeat a particular bill or amendment or elect a particular candidate--then what are we doing here?

[sui generis]

26. that's not very existentialist!

DU is a synergy of many views and personal motivations for being here, and I'd add that most people are pretty pluralistic in their rationale for posting here. We opine on our favorite themes, commiserate, organize, contribute, participate, and even just hang out with our on-line friends and acquaintances. At my business I have six hours of very focused meetings a day, the daily scrums and dramas of my staff, and tons of real "work" to do.

Typically I fire off a response between meetings - or whenever I have a few minutes between the rest of the rigor, so I think of it as a portal for many things, not just political action. Else, why have a lounge? Why have social groups that talk about baking and music and literature? It's bigger than the sum of its parts, but if it were only one part, it wouldn't be big at all.

[Ozymanithrax]

7. Certainly, the "right-wing corporate shill" is a broad generalization.

Many here like Obama. We have very spirited discussions on the matter.

I can't speak for Free Republic, as I rarely visit or read their website.

The problem with calling him a "moderate" is that they are equally detested here. It is also an unhelpful term. Obama is not and never was a progressive, though many of who dress left thought he was. Legislative policy now is very much driven by the realities of what is possible, and a real progress reform isn't possible with this Congress, nor any that I foresee.

I think the best description would be a pragmatist.

Welcome to DU. I followed your career in comics in the 60's, and I love the ring.

[gratuitous]

18. Well, I'm not sure what their evidence is . . .

What would buttress their claim that President Obama is a "radical socialist"? Because I don't see much evidence of that, and would be interested to see what constitutes this radical socialism.

As for "corporate shilling," I guess I'd point to the bail-out of large financial interests while letting individuals go hang during the Big Money Crisis of 2008-09. There was certainly a lot of lip service paid to helping out underwater mortgage holders, but when the actual results came out, most of the balm seemed to be applied to the likes of Bank of America and AIG. Additionally, when reform of the health care system was first proposed, a lot of rhetoric was expended for individuals screwed over by the present system. But as the legislation takes shape, it seems that far more consideration has been taken to make sure that health insurance companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers are well taken care of. I haven't seen the administration providing much leadership to head off an overhaul that entrenches corporate prerogative while empowering individual health care consumers.

But the truth is surely somewhere in the middle, and the Obama administration is just as fine as paint for most of the citizens, the bulk of the evidence to the contrary. It's such a soothing thought, it must be true.

[Marr]

23. You're assuming the two groups are equal.

Free Republic, like the rest of the far-right in today's United States, does not draw it's opinions from objective facts and figures. Their opinions are provided to them by well-financed propagandists.

This is like saying climate change is in dispute because Rush Limbaugh rejects the scientific research.

I can offer examples for why I think the Obama Administration is too entwined with, and subservient to, big corporate interests. If Freepers can make a rational argument that Obama is a radical socialist, I haven't heard it.

[DainBramaged]

24. Freeper means lack of facts, didn't you see that in the Dictionary

next to the definition of morons?

[ClassWarrior]

25. No Center, No Centrists

"No Center, No Centrists
by George Lakoff

“Centrism” is the creation of an inaccurate self-serving metaphor, and it is time to bury it.

There is no left to right linear spectrum in the American political life. There are two systems of values and modes of thought - call them progressive and conservative (or nurturant and strict, as I have). There are total progressives, who use a progressive mode of thought on all issues. And total conservatives. And there are lots of folks who are what I’ve called “biconceptuals”: progressive on certain issue areas and conservative on others. But they don’t form a linear scale. They are all over the place: progressive on domestic policy, conservative on foreign policy; conservative on economic policy, progressive on foreign policy and social issues; conservative on religion, but progressive on social issues and foreign policy; and on and on. No linear scale. No single set of values defining a “center.” Indeed many of such folks are not moderate in their views; they can be quite passionate about both their progressive and conservative views.Barack Obama has it right: Get rid of the very idea of the right and the left and the center. American ideas are fundamentally progressive ideas - the ideas this country was founded on and that carry forth that spirit. Progressives care about people and the earth, and act with responsibility and strength on that care...

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/15/3174

NGU.

[Orsino]

30. Fail.

False equivalency.

[surrealAmerican]

31. That's where you're wrong:

... they are far more convinced that they are right then we are. People here have been known to reevaluate their positions as new information becomes available. With them, every little thing is ideological; they do not change their position if research indicates it to be lacking.