We hardly have moderate Democrats and you think that there is a chance of moderate republicans, you are just flat delusional. This is an oligarchy, run by and for the rich. Possibly not more than 10 per cent of all elected officials don't sell out for cash money or favors.

Look at Murtha of PA, dig into his past and you see real corruption that dwarfs Ted Stevens of Alaska by 50 times.

On the health care issue, if most democrats truly wanted single payer, quite frankly I think that would be somewhere on the table. (I personally would welcome such a thing, but I have no problem being thought of as somewhat extreme on this particular topic.) It hasn't even been brought up as a possibility. The public option is quite far from single payer. With a 60-seat majority, wouldn't it be at least a topic of discussion if that's where the hearts and minds of the dems were?

On abortion — I'm about as lefty as they come on this issue, as in full-on feminist, and the only one of the “moderate” viewpoints I don't hold is the parental consent part of your description. I run with a lot of pro-choice activists, and I don't know *anyone* whose views could be summed up as “believes in abortion on demand, without exception”. That description would go far beyond what is in Roe, and most pro-choice people (including the most adament) just want to be able to keep the protections written into that decision.

The current health plan is not moderate…it is loaded with top down government control of the healthcare delivery system, includes a public option (very different from a pooled fund of private insurers) and seeks to fund the system on the backs of one class, the wealthy. That it turned out not to be a single payor system is a factor of vote getting, not ideological preference of the most of democrats.

Any moderation on abortion is largely the result of court action and republican efforts at the state level to water down Roe v Wade.

Certainly, some democrats are moderate, just as some republicans are moderate, but moderates are in the minority of both parties, and control neither. Moderates in both parties do wield power beyond their numbers because of the voting requirements in Congress, but please do not mistake that for leadership positions, key committee chairs or principal responsibility for legislation. I give democrats this much credit: in order to gain control of the House and Senate, they actively recruited moderates to run in swing districts and did so with great success.

The hijacking of the major parties by the extremes of each and the uncomfortable position of moderates in both parties is a fascinating topic for another time. I have long advocated, and will again here, the uniting of moderate republicans, moderate democrats and moderate independents into a viable third party, but, alas, that too is a subject for another time.

Sad….very sad.

Healthcare: A LIBERAL believes in universal, single payor, government controlled healthcare, including government control of the medical services industry. A MODERATE believes in providing healthcare to the maximum population possible in public/private partnership, perhaps through a pooled insurance fund, funded in a rational manner (not exclusively on the backs of one class of citizens), with a cooperative effort to increase efficiency (rather than increase government control ) of the healthcare delivery system.

Abortion: A LIBERAL believes in abortion on demand, without exception. A MODERATE believes that the right to privacy and individual choice should be maintained, i.e. that abortion should remain legal, but that there are justifications for reasonable restrictions like health and safety certification of abortion clinics, parental consent for surgical procedures for minors, and restrictions on late term abortions.

What are moderates offering? Foreign-language films full of nuance and complexity and shades of gray. Dry documentaries about economics and history and sociology, where there are no heroes and problems are worked out only patiently over decades. Borrr-rring! How are you hoping to put butts in seats that way?

Whether true or not, conservatives have done a good job of getting people to believe that “moderate” is really just another word for liberal. So, are they right? In your opinion, in what way exactly would a moderate differ from a liberal?

Take, for example, two issues:

1. Health care – A liberal believes _________. A moderate believes __________.

2. Abortion — A liberal believes ____________. A moderate believes _________.

Let's see if we can tease out some real differences.

I really believe heterosexual folks fall into two categories, those who hate us to our faces, and those who hate us behind our backs, out of some kind of liberal guilt. I personally prefer the open disdain, like from you, because at least I know what I'm dealing with.

Wealthy moderates or moderates from swing areas can survive locally, but across the board, they can't wield enough power nationally to compete against the wackos.

Also Democrats are perceived as weak on defense. The Democrat party needs, IMO, to better foster the impression that we are wiser on defense than the republicans, rather than weaker. Which should, by all intent and purpose, be an easy task.

Currently we are being held back by Blue Dog Democrats on the healthcare issue. Self defeating the Democrat party. Its stupid. Our “conservative wing” should be sticking closer to the party by bashing gay rights and remaining quieter on core issues. Both will get them re-elected.

I can imagine the outcome of the French revolution had French revolutionary patriots marching from Marseilles to Paris had been quibbling the fine points of why they joined the revolution, instead of singing together in unison.

So it would seem that are problematic moderates within both the Republican and Democrat parties

lol