Extremism is just another word for…losing the debate
Posted by: Donna
So I saw from my Twitter feed that it was an eventful afternoon at the Arizona State Capitol the other day. Lots of bills debated and observers of the Senate Government and Environment Committee were treated a debate over whether sustainability is a communist UN plot or not courtesy of, natch, the Republicans on the committee.
This puts me in mind of something I’ve been meaning to propose to my fellow Dems for a while: Knock it off with labeling every egregious thing the other side does as “extreme”. “Extreme” is getting to be as stale and meaningless as “civility” these days. It’s a squishy, subjective concept that can be appropriated by anyone and lends itself far too easily to the false equivalence. To wit, you (a well-meaning liberal) can rattle off an endless list of conservative politicians and pundits, with extensive examples of frightening rhetoric and policy positions. But the conservatives will always find that one liberal who said something stupid on TV or some obscure professor who hypothesized a radical leftist position that one time and then, bam, it’s “extremism on both sides!” This is complete lopsided nonsense, of course, but the Right gets away with it because (as I’ve pointed out before) the most shockingly bigoted right wing Republican votes pro-corporate 100% of the time and even the most non-threatening moderate Dem sometimes votes against Big Business. There is literally no other explanation for it. If rabid social conservatives were regularly voting against tax cuts and for regulations on businesses, then…well…Rick Santorum would be an unknown former state legislative staffer today, if that.
So invoking “extremism” serves no purpose, really. It only contributes to annoyingly frequent outbreaks of chin-stroking by Very Serious Establishment PeopleTM, who are so very concerned about, yes, you people, and your “extremism on both sides!” I propose we make it harder for both the conservatives and the oblivious elite chin-strokers by using more specific terms. Make them learn some new words and phrases! Such as unscientific, willfully ignorant, callous, unfair, irrational, malevolent etc. Sure, the conservatives will try to appropriate them to their ends, but they won’t have as easy a time as they have had with “extremism”.
The other reason to jettison “extremism” as the go-to descriptor of Republican malfeasance (another word!) is that it is not an accurate reflection of where they are today. Geez, half of their primary voters think Barack Obama wasn’t born in the US! Not to mention the long, sordid laundry list of ludicrous (there’s another word!) positions held by the majority of GOP politicians and their base. They’re not extreme GOP positions, they’re mainstream ones. Calling them “extreme” gives them cool cred they don’t deserve. They’re really just boring followers.
9 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
Very Serious Establishment PeopleTM, who are so very concerned about, yes, you people, and your “extremism on both sideso
Yah, that’s the old Broderism. One lefty loon makes both sides extreme, and only a paid village hack can explain to us unwashed how a center right Republican majority will save us.
I think there are two big problems that the wise ones have played into both through corportate pressure and sheer cowardice.
First is this one (from Wiki)
Argument to moderation… is an informal fallacy which asserts that the truth can be found as a compromise between two opposite positions
The problem with this guy is the basic but not alway true assumption that both sides are correct.
Which is where journalistic laziness and cowardice come to play. Easier to sell this fallacy than to actually investigate and report the truth about Republican policies.
That one because of laziness and pressure has helped move the Overton Window to the right so far that centerist policies of the past are now seen as leftist or far left. Therefore the argument to moderation places the false “center” actually to the right if not far right, making a rather centerist President like Obama seem liberal.
Very good illustration and description of the Overton Window at CORRENTE
Since when did a President spending his country into bankruptcy become a ” Centrist ” ? Same ole left wing delusion .
Silly. Bush wasn’t a centerist.
Timmys Cat,
Dare you to splain the difference between $ 4 Trillion of debt over 8 years and $ 6 Trillion of debt run up in 4 years . Double cat dare you .
Bush tax cuts, wars, stimulus (which was 1/3 tax cuts), Medicare Part D, economic downturn.
Alan honey bun! Are you going all disengenous on us? You know very well the debt exploded under Bushie and Obama is saddled with a Cheney culture of “Deficits don’t matter.” carryover. All Presidents have an increase under them, and Obamas has just added to the top of a very high mountain by trying to stem the bleeding.
If you were a loyal little trollie and followed Diva you would recognize this
CHART
the Republicans will end up blaming Obama for the policies they pushed in the Bush years, and the recession that began on a Republican president’s watch, and a continuation of tax cuts that they supported. They’ll have to. Because if they took all that off the debt clock, there wouldn’t be much debt there to blame him for at all.
Alan dear since you didn’t double doooo…yech dare me, check out my Forbes link comment in Divas Robb post before ou reply.
Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Who knew?
Timmys Cat ,
Why is it that if I call a woman ” dear ” or ” honey bun ” I am a male chauvinist pig ? Yet you address me with those terms . I beginning to think Liberals use a double standard .
Anyway , I love your bizarro world accounting . President Obama is running up debt at more than twice the rate George Bush did . Why is it that President Bush was responsible for everything that occurred during his 8 years, yet nothing President Obama has done is his fault ?
Hi Donna .
When Barak Obama leaves office and the Country is bankrupt, that will be historic and still not his fault .
Obama is the crisis President . He came to power only because of a crisis . He has governed by creating crisis after crisis .
if I call a woman ” dear ” or ” honey bun ” I am a male chauvinist pig ?
Why is it that President Bush was responsible for everything that occurred during his 8 years, yet nothing President Obama has done is his fault ?
and the Country is bankrupt, that will be historic and still not his fault .
Red herring questions, unsubstantiated conclusions, ominous hyperbole,.and odd capitalization.
Ima starting to wonder if this isn’t the Slater troll. The old Alan backed up his arguments, this one is just wants to spout talking points and pick a fight.
Whatever, it’s boring.
Owwt!