Ya think maybe that's why I said:
... a far left "moderate" (aka a demonrat)...
There are, of course, no conservatives. And no liberals.
Okay, happy to see the entire lexicon is now being rewritten to accomodate the poe at the top of the ticket.
con·ser·va·tive (kən-sûr'və-tĭv)
adj.
4.
a. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
b. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
n.
One favoring traditional views and values.
conservatism
noun
1. the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change.
2. the principles and practices of political conservatives.
lib·er·al (lĭb'ər-əl, lĭb'rəl)
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
n.
A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
Well, fair enough. So which traditional view or value would you say Obama embraces? Would we agree that he opposes murder of a human being over the age of 20 years? I think he probably does oppose that, and I think you agree.
So he is a conservative. He embraces that traditional value.
McCain does, too.
Another traditional view or value would be, in 1861, that slavery is permitted in the US. Since conservatism is absolute and timeless, then this traditional value would define it. I suspect neither McCain nor Obama would embrace that position. I suspect you would not, either.
This makes you a liberal, perhaps?
So . . . either conservatism is relative and is redefined by the times or it is absolute and timeless. And the bad news is, there is no “gray area”, because that would be relativistic. It either is absolute and timeless, or it is not.
The conclusion is, obviously, there are people more conservative than others. There are people more liberal than others. Conservatism is not absolute and timeless. It is relative.
McCain is more conservative than Obama.