I spoke to a very thoughtful caller this morning about several recent stories that discuss the struggle within Kansas' GOP between what's termed in The Star and elsewhere the moderate and conservative factions in the party.
My caller said it's his impression that there are many people who would call themselves "conservative," but that their personal political views don't fall in line with those of the recent winners in Kansas, for example.
"It's my feeling that we have -- and by we I mean all of us, including the news media -- let a segment that is more extreme than most of us take over a name," he said. "And to me, that devalues or at least I guess redefines the name."
This is a topic I've thought about many times through the years, and it has a lot of merit. After all, there are no dictionary definitions of these terms. And the discussion goes beyond moderate and conservative as well. Many people who would describe themselves in various terms generally relating to the left (liberal or progressive, for example) also hold opinions that most would generally describe as conservative or at least traditional. It's very much untrue to claim that liberals disapprove of or denigrate the traditional mother/father family model, for example -- though to listen to some of the showman commentators who call themselves the arbiters of conservatism, you might get that impression.
I also think my caller has an interpretation that changes drastically from person to person. He thinks the term "conservative" as applied in the discussion of the Kansas Legislature has a more positive connotation than the term "moderate." My experience tells me that's undoubtedly true for some, but there are also many who think that term is as negative as they come.
A side note: I believe many more people proudly call themselves "conservative" than those on the left who self-describe as "liberal." I don't think those two words are equivalent antonyms, and I'm hard-pressed to come up with any pair that works better. It's been my experience than few people on the left agree on the terminology. (Though I don't buy the argument that this is because the left doesn't see anything in black and white. Trust me -- I talk to plenty of people on that side of the aisle who have no problem drawing clear battle lines.)
My caller and I ended this conversation as others have always ended in the past: We agree there's no good solution. For better or worse, people love to apply labels, to themselves and others. Many of the politicians involved in this particular instance use the terms themselves.
But do they have a concrete meaning? There are clear philosophical differences among lawmakers within the same party, and voting blocs have a direct impact on public policy. But I agree, as always, that labels of all kinds are a journalistic minefield, because they lead to misunderstanding among the many different factions that overlap beneath them.

The definitions are simple:
The definitions are simple: Conservatives have firm convictions on a variety of issues; taxes, spending, the role of government in the economy, illegal immigration, abortion, Constitutional liberties and responsibilities. Moderates believe in NOTHING, except being on the winning side in every issue. The only passions in politics are on the Left and Right. The role of moderates in both parties are to split the differences, make deals, and pat themselves on the back to celebrate their "statesmanship". Think Rush Limbaugh and Bob Dole to put human faces on conservatives and moderates.
more derekdeception
It's laughable to try to split the R side because Der (likely pronounced "durr") is a lib. If Der truly thinks this president's policies deserve re-election, he is a bigger homer cornhole than the "gawdawful" Bob Davis is for KU basketball. And equally as talentless. But this probably won't get posted because 1) Libs are really sensitive when the truth gets handed to them, and 2) Der is probably hopelessly in love with Bob.
Words / Terms
Since about 1960, Republicans have known exactly which was the "general wing" and which was the "conservative wing" of the party. I would contend that the platform almost always leaned toward the TRUE, or conservative wing of the party.
Through time, the country has drifted several thousand miles LEFT, with barely a law, or decision, or regulation bringing us back toward "home". And along with ALL THAT LEFTWARD COMPROMISE (which most of us conservatives DETESTED - and still do), more and more Republicnas drifted away from principle. But it NEVER changed the principle.
The country is in BIG TROUBLE, almost EXCLUSIVELY because of that leftward (DEMOCRAT) drift....fiscally, morally, internationally.....in EVERY WAY. And mnay Republicans have gone along to get along, especially since the MEDIA is 80-90 percent DEMOCRAT (and always has been, since the 60s at least, until maybe the last few years). So, some Republicans can say they are Republicans, but there is NO RESEMBLANCE to the actual animal. NONE.
We don't want those liars, and we are sending them away, one batch at a time.
DEMOCRATS...heck...they change their name every time the public catches on to them. FREQUENT CHANGES. So, all ya ever gotta remember, is that they STILL RUN FOR OFFICE as DEMOCRATS! (Until we get to some of the local elections, and boards, and things.....and we will deal with that in the next wave....but people are catching on, because they lie there too, even if they won't commit to being DEMOCRAT).
Yours Truly,
BobHaze
Liberal
I hate labels too but guess I will call myself a liberal Democrat. While there are great divides between so-called conservatives and liberals, it would be nice to start where we have common ground and then work our way out from there. From my conversations with diversely opinionated friends and family, I would say these might include eliminating perpetual campaigning, reducing lobbyists (mainly bribery) in the state houses, limits on Congress and Supreme Court tenure, that members of Congress are required to show their tax returns at least every couple of years AND have the same health care as the rest of us. (Not much in the way of legislation on any of the above, huh?)
I do not vote for eliminating government all together. I just want government to do the job it is tasked with in providing safety, security, and infrastructure for its citizens….ALL its citizens.