Rhode Island 1946

double standard noted.

he is NOT quite conservative

all you are doing is defining YOUR extremist far left stance

he is a hawkish moderate dem.

much like kennedy

because the dem PARTY is not

perfect example:

(an actual example, not your "guilt by buttociation" wanking)

how many pro-choice repubs were KEYNOTE speakers at the repub convention

i can recall two right off the bat: arnold and guiliani

how many pro-life dems were keynotes at the dem convention?:

hmmm...

repub party HAS become a bigger tent

as a pro-choice repub, i am far more accepted by open minded repubs than any pro-life dem will ever be. pro-life dems are marginalized.

pro-choice repubs are NOT.

so, your last statement is false

and the fact that you can't accept that lieberman is a MODERATE dem just goes to show how far from moderate you are.

from the extreme left (or extreme right) moderates on EITHER side of the spectrum appear too far away to even BE on your side of the spectrum

it's relative to your extremism. similarly, to a bircher, moderate repubs (like guiliani) seem like LIBERALS

and i have heard extremist rightwingers claim that guiliani *is* liberal. in the same way you are claiming that lieberman is "quite conservative"

take off your extremist LENS for a second and see the concept as it is.

hey, i accept that you are FAR left. that's fine. it doesn't therefore follow that MODERATE on the left are in fact "quite conservative"

i am sure katrina van den heuvel et al would make that claim. just as the birchers would about guiliani.

continue to live in your extremist ghetto. but don'; think that you have the frame of reference to define the moderates near the middle note the irony. you have the same extremism disease as a bircher.

you can't see moderates for what they are. because of extremism. very understandable, but still more indicative of your extremism than anything else.

whit