-
Global Warming on 15-Year Hold
April 2, 2012 | 12 comments
-
Suddenly This Summer
March 31, 2012 | 8 comments
-
FakeGate: Just Another Day at Team Green
February 22, 2012 | 7 comments
-
“Climate” and the Campaign
January 12, 2012 | 8 comments
-
Germany’s Green Bubble Follows Spain’s; Will Congress Waste More Billions on Ours?
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
The Spectacle Blog
There’s so much that could still be said in the aftermath of the Delaware primary, but as previously indicated I believe the primary should be treated as what it is, which is over. In that spirit we’ll let even the aftermath lie. So long as it seems willing to lay there.
But what does cry out for discourse is the by-now-routine, very tired rhetoric by the tantrum-throwers and wishful thinkers that “the Republican party has no room for moderates”, trotted out again as it is every time Republicans decide that while there’s room for moderates, well, given a choice they sometimes have a preference for non-liberals. Foul!, the entitled cry.
In each such instance we are treated by the self- and media-styled moderates to this unbecoming sniveling. Specter was pushed out. Castle…pushed out. Poor Bob Bennett. No room. Even Scott Brown — the widespread support enabling his election being itself proof that conservatives not only tolerate but will fight for moderates — has stumbled into this intellectual bog. Folks, do your selves a favor and show some moderation in all of this entitlement and self-pity.
Republicans, as their principles indicate, have a preference for non-liberals. Yes, as one writer for another publication oddly invoked as evidence that Mike Castle ought to be granted the nomination, Castle hadn’t ever faced challenge before (and, when he did, his response was not pretty and arguably evidence enough that he should be retired).
So he, too, was proof that conservatives and other mainstream Republicans had room for such a “moderate”, again and again. Then in a year when people think they can affect change, and plot a less dangerous course, a choice emerged and it was chosen. Foul!, the entitled cry. Proof that you are intolerant!, the intolerant whimper.
Liberal Republicans are called “moderates” because the Left owns the language; it suits their purposes to imply that the base of the party requires moderation because it is, well, extreme (the belated emergence of the term “moderate Democrat” in the Age of Obama has been extremely gratifying).
Moderates are welcome. They are not welcome, however, to be entitled. If you won’t play unless you win then please, do take your ball and go where you feel more comfortable. It’s your choice but if you have no room for conservatives, if you have no room for those who want your contribution but not your entitled dominance, then go, already. But please drop the silly insistence that this makes others intolerant of you.
View all comments (15) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Chris Horner
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/09/16/intolerant-the-intolerant-crie
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JP| 9.16.10 @ 4:17PM
It is no coincidence that most of the "Moderates" in the GOP come from New England. These men and women could never get elected as Democrats. That doesn't mean that they are even slightly conservative. It just means that for various reasons (seniority, family history, political grudges, etc..) that thier only shot at national politics is the GOP. Mayor Bloomberg is about as good an example as any.
So, a good definition of a Moderate Republican is a Liberal who couldn't get elected as a Democrat.
Oldefarte| 9.16.10 @ 4:24PM
Call/term it what you want to, but the sole purpose of this movement is NOT whether a candidate is Democrat, Republican, moderate, liberal, conservative, or ONE-EYED, ONE-HORNED, FLYING PURPLE PEOPLE EATERS; as long as their 150%/completely loyal to their constituents' wishes, pledge to reduce substantially wasteful government spending of TAXPAYERS' HARD-EARNED MONEY, do not proclamate asinine public social policy agendas to placate the extreme wishes of radical-extreme constituents, and in general SIMPLY DO THE PEOPLES' BUSINESS AFTER BEING ELECTED TO DO SO [in other words, DO YOUR JOB]!!!!!!!!
Tom | 9.16.10 @ 4:36PM
The Mike Castles and the pundits who support them just don't get it. They can't see the forest for the trees. The Tea Party movement can reform the GOP . Hopefully, it will reverse the tide of Big Government.
Too bad to those who don't see it. Maybe they can get jobs in the private non-media sector.
Hawkins| 9.16.10 @ 5:16PM
Something occurred to me while reading this article. What the so-called "moderates" rail against is "anyone who does not want to grow the size of government". That is, in essence, what the TEA Party is about. Fiscal responsibility, lowering taxes and shrinking government. If you are for that, according to the "moderates" you are "extreme". Seems to me that the people who'd be affected by that the most are people who are interested in government power. In that case, the so called "moderates" fit right alongside the liberal Left.
I think you can break it down thusly:
Leftists: Grow government as fast as possible
"moderate" republicans: Grow government but slower than the Leftists
TEA Party extremists: Shrink government.
Booger| 9.16.10 @ 6:18PM
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
If you do not know who said this, or why, or if you find this offensive....MAY THE FLEAS OF TEN THOUSAND LEPROUS CAMELS INFEST YOUR NOSE HAIRS!!!!!!
Cordially,
Booger
Conspiracy Theory| 9.16.10 @ 7:21PM
Google says: Barry Goldwater...
Booger| 9.16.10 @ 10:00PM
Congratulations. No leprous camels' fleas for you!
Matt X| 9.16.10 @ 8:51PM
Awesome post. Jim Gerahty over at NRO and some others might label you an activist though. Teh heh. Apparently if you don't support whoever some moderate or dispassionate Republicans support for political office (did any of them support Castle because they agree with him on the issues?), you are an activist, even if you are just a guy on the internet or some other opinion sharing you opinion on politics with other citizens interested in politics.
Rich Rostrom| 9.17.10 @ 4:29AM
If this is the future of conservatism, then it has no future. No healthy political movement ever triumphed by embracing delusion.
People like Mike Castle are called "moderates" because they ARE moderates. Castle's voting record has been, consistently, about 50/50. That's about as liberal as a Republican gets; it's also about as conservative as a Democrat gets. Meaning not liberal. Meaning voted for 14 of the 25 positions rated by the ACU in 2009.
As Don Rumsfeld said, "Everyone has a right to his own opinion, but not to his own facts."
greghawk| 9.17.10 @ 4:48AM
The administration cyberwar operation continues. These Chicago posters are clever.
Tom McK| 9.17.10 @ 11:56AM
It is fascinating that elitists in the Republican Party use the same tactics as liberals in the Democrat Party. It identifies them as similar if not the same. Their rhetoric emanates from their perspective, delivered as if it is everyone's central focal point. Thus, tea party candidates are extreme, as a distance, from the left winger, whether the left winger belongs to the Republican or Democrat party.
The trick is that the left winger makes one believe that he is in the center of the receiving world's universe through the language he wields and the media outlets' reporting. Left wingers whip up emotion to cover for their vacuous or indefensible positions, and belittle opponents to shift one's focus from them. They also rely upon individuals making little effort to remember what it is that they say and do.
It is up to we who receive the left winger's information, to identify the source of the information and the source's perspective. Then we must analze and interpret the information through our knowledge and (long) memories.
Kevin Kelley| 9.17.10 @ 12:30PM
So called "Moderates" belong in the democrat party. Thus those left wing extremists will be diluted bring that party more in line with the mainstream. The real problem is that conservatives, and moderates landed in the republican party because these same moderates were forced out of the democrat party when McGovern was their nominee.