Well I'd start by defining it as someone who uses four exclamation points to defend a conservative policy ^^;
The Supreme Court was on the ballot in 2004 as part of GWB platform and I don't know anyone who was saying the Senate would not confirm a truly conservative judge. And no, I don't think someone who is pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and who works to decrease the size of government an extremist. I'm all three of those :)
It's almost never an issue of values, it's almost always an issue of degrees and rhetoric. You have to learn to calm yourself before you can seek practical solutions. I'll take a small win any day, every day. The hardliners want the 100% of their view in initiatives NOW and don't care if they lose the battle, the war, and the country.
How shallow. Besides, that wasn't in defense of a conservative policy. It was the end of a statement about a historical fact.
If you didn't hear anyone talk about who the Senate would and would not confirm then you simply were not following the story.
You are foolishly putting weight behind empty labels without providing any clear definitions of those labels. Hardliners. Extremists. Etc. You have not made a point because you have not defined anything. All you have done is make a statement against exclamation points. I hardly think that is a solid conservative value or even remotely persuasive rhetoric. You're nothing but a name caller. Is that something you define as calm and practical?
Thats so true. I think people from the "far right" are living in a land of illusion. IN 2000 Gore got more votes than Bush and we barely won the Electoral college. Kerry, a huge liberal, also got what 48 49 percent of the vote. I am not saying Conservatives violate their principles but Govt runs also on compromise. That is not a dirty word. We almost have the Supreme Court in our grasp. BUt do not be fooled we are just basically reappointing conservatives. We are one HEart attack away on the Court from Conservatives being in dire straits and maybe having the Court have a Liberal majority for years to come if we dont retain the White House. It is essential that we ttake the White House 4 years from now and hopefully if that happens encourage Scalia to maybe resign so we can replace him at the least and hopefully replace Stevens
As to the HOuse. Folks this a 15 seat majority. We do not want John Conyers head of the JUdicary committee. Its like on the immigration issue. How come when listen to Dem Gov Richardson who wants to secure our borders it seems reasonable. I listen to the far right and their rehtoric on the issue and I start recoiling. Why is that? Esp since I agree with then on about 80% of what they say. If I am recoiling then you can bet the vast middle will. Baby steps is needed. That doesnt mean no bold conservative iniatives. But whats developing iis a conservative purity test that will defeat us and snatch defeat out of the jawas of victory. The purple areas do rule. Minnesota, Wisconsin etc are starting to trend for us lets not quit looking long term.