So Much For "The Moderate Voice"

Time was when I liked Joe Gandleman's The Moderate Voice. But it increasingly seems as though the site is getting out of hand, assuming it wants to be seen as moderate. Sorry, but this is really way too much on a day when even Bob Geldof was praising Bush for his efforts regarding Africa. And this Kern fellow seems to be simply trolling his own Leftist tripe with the linkage. So Bush is in Africa for the oil and should be standing trial in The Hague instead? Sorry, but moderate my ass, Joe. And this isn't the first time I've noticed similar garbage. Pimp the BDS stuff to the Left from now on. I'm done. And I don't use the word garbage lightly.

"In all of Bush's life, he has represented the American ruling and rich business elite. He only became president because they needed him to get there and guarantee their interests. … it is this hegemony that Bush seeks to further perpetrate in his new-found role as Father Christmas of Africa … The gullible may believe this PR stunt - but not the majority of people around the world who will take to the streets in wild jubilation the day President Bush steps down, not only as President of America, but as tormentor-in-chief of our world."

President Bush is here for our oil, nothing more nothing less!

If President Bush wasn't American President, he would be standing trial in The Hague for crimes against humanity. Under his supervision as Commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, in Iraq and Afghanistan hundreds of women have been raped, thousands of children and innocent civilians have lost their lives and many have been buried in mass graves - including those who couldn’t be identified because American bombs tore them to pieces.

Comments

[DWC]

I also see over there the "moderate" suggestion that McCain ought to pick Christine Todd Whitman, of all people, as VP. Yessir, the middle of the road: the refuge of liberal Republicans and dead possums.

[Kaitian]

That article's funny. I give him points for recycling the Democratic Underground talking points.

[Jimmie]

Dan, if you liked that post, you're going to love one posted yesterday (http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/2008-elections/17878/michelle-obama-american-pride/). And it wasn't a cut and paste from a column, either. All original crazy there. And the commentors, save Rick Moran, ate it up.

[docweasel]

This is reallly out of character and disappointing. I often clicked over to Gandelman's page to get a 3rd opinion on contentious issues where both sides were taking the stereotypical left/right dichotomy, and Gandelman often had an interesting, unique perspective.

Maybe his bias on who he personally wants to see win the election is coloring his coverage. I wouldn't give up on him yet, but this is a sad occurance. :/

[seekeronos]

"--- Yessir, the middle of the road: the refuge of liberal Republicans and dead possums. ---"

A truism if there ever was one.

[templar knight]

"A truism if there ever was one."

LOL! Roadkill, if you will, seek, and exactly where the Republicans will be come November. If something doesn't change drastically.

[syn]

I take it that the moderate position doesn't really like helping the poor and oppressed any more than does the Left?

If anyone thinks the last seven years of crazy hate towards Bush and Republicans was bad, just wait until the moderates join the Left in going after 'the old white man who is an extension of McChimpHilter and the evil Rethuglian regime for denying the Selected One his rightful place as the Messiah who will purify the puritans out of America's soul'.

[Chad]

Well, you're right, of course. I still post a comment or two over there, if nothing else to add some balance. Anyway, here's an interesting statistic for you. In the 2004 election, network exit polls showed that "21 percent of the voters who cast ballots called themselves liberal, 34 percent said they were conservative, and 45 percent called themselves moderate." But when you ask these "moderates" where they stand on the issues, you find that their values are consistent with the liberal worldview and they vote their values.

What does that mean? Simply that a liberal by any other name is, in fact, the same.

[Chad]

Well, you're right, of course. I still post a comment or two over there, if nothing else to add some balance. Anyway, here's an interesting statistic for you. In the 2004 election, network exit polls showed that "21 percent of the voters who cast ballots called themselves liberal, 34 percent said they were conservative, and 45 percent called themselves moderate." But when you ask these "moderates" where they stand on the issues, you find that their values are consistent with the liberal worldview and they vote their values.

What does that mean? Simply that a liberal by any other name is, in fact, the same.