Originally posted by: Charles Higgins
Mark..depends on the specifc issue, or set of issues. What is extreme? We'd have to define that, based on a given issue; those definitions would vary a bunch depending on who might be participating in the debate. One of the Freedom Caucus group's base intents is to redistribute some power ( eg bill-forwarding for legislation) from the leadership to the rank and file members. There's merit in that in my view, provided limitations on any real nutjob participation. Now we have to define real nutjobs, I guess. Forcing R legislative bills to the floor for a vote ought to be decided by the entire R body( the original founding intent); it often doesn't appear to work that way in reality. McCarthy has schemed for years to get the position; I have no idea if he will.
Yeah, the House R's are going to cripple themselves further if they involve too much infighting regarding the likely upcoming House Speakership issue. An obvious fact recently proven yet again (midterms) when legislative members / candidates cross some varying 'extreme' boundary line/s.
Oh, come on...we've all already heard the RepubliQ definition of "extreme": it's "any policy or position espoused by Democrats." I've bet with myself--and won every time--that any RepubliQ talking head/politician/scumbag, speaking about Democratic policies, will say the phrase "extreme right-wing" within a minute of opening his yap.
One online dictionary states that the word means "severe or drastic, far from moderate." The etymological definition is from Latin, "in extremis," which referred to the farthest point from the center: the physical borders of Rome, or the outer perimeter of a military camp. So "extremist" is the opposite of "centrist."
So I think that from a sociopolitical standpoint, "extreme" would have to refer to a small number of positions--true outliers. In, say, 2010, storming the Capitol to kill everyone within would have been considered extreme; however, now, it's a central, integral part of RepubliQ policy. Denying the reality of electoral results would have been considered extreme; now, it's a fundamental part of the RepubliQ platform.
So maybe we'll have to expand the boundaries. When the average RepubliQ talks happily about murdering the government and screams that every election his side lost was "fake," you can no longer call those stances extreme.
Which, of course, makes me wonder what Joe RepubliQ does consider extreme--gunning down people waiting in line to vote? Concentration camps for nonwhite people? Blowing up churches that have Black congregations? Oh, wait, that last one has become mainstream.
