Despite our near-pathological need to label and categorize, the United States isn't really a far-left and a far-right country, bright red and bright blue. While such demographic labels are convenient for political debate - and indispensable to column writing - the fact is that most Americans dwell in that vast lavender (purple?) area in between.

In that middle, people are complex and hold a variety of views, some liberal, some conservative, depending on the issue. Most don't cleave to an either-or position on even the hot-button issues. Many Americans still support a woman's right to abortion, for instance, but think reasonable limits can be set without condemning women to life terms in the kitchen.

The debate, meanwhile, about whether "moral values" was the compelling force behind Bush's victory seems slightly off point. Exit polls showing "moral values" as the most important issue for voters (22 percent cited it) were refuted subsequently by other polls, leading some to insist that the election wasn't about values after all.

What they mean, probably correctly, is that the election wasn't only about far-right concerns such as same-sex marriage, abortion and stem cell research. But of course it was about moral values - what's right and what's wrong, from war to national character - and the vote took us right of center.



http://www.townhall.com/columnists/kathleenparker/kp20041117.shtml

Notice how those on the left think its so wrong to say anything bad about muslims or islam, that is supposed to be a religion on peace and now muslims are all of a sudden a protected group and they are begging for religious tolerance, but they have no problem bashing christians (which I am not one BTW) or bringing up the whole jihadist mentality and saying that all christians are somehow really jihadists, being against queer marriage or partial birth abortion somehow makes you a fundamentalist or a terrorist. Why is it wrong to slander and attack muslims but ok to attack christians?

i think the whole religous issues in politics are way overrater. most people just live their lives. they dont care about querr marriage, absence (or presence of commandment monuments) or abortion for their teenage kids. why do both camps attack each other. calling each other bigots and secularists.

Notice how those on the left think its so wrong to say anything bad about muslims or islam, that is supposed to be a religion on peace and now muslims are all of a sudden a protected group and they are begging for religious tolerance, but they have no problem bashing christians (which I am not one BTW) or bringing up the whole jihadist mentality and saying that all christians are somehow really jihadists, being against queer marriage or partial birth abortion somehow makes you a fundamentalist or a terrorist. Why is it wrong to slander and attack muslims but ok to attack christians?

well fundamentalism is not neceseraly a bad thing. if it aims at "revivalism and reform" its a good thing.

Despite our near-pathological need to label and categorize, the United States isn't really a far-left and a far-right country, bright red and bright blue. While such demographic labels are convenient for political debate - and indispensable to column writing - the fact is that most Americans dwell in that vast lavender (purple?) area in between.


And this would be that vast purple area. Some people need to realize we are still one America.

http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/purple_america_2004.gif

Wheres all the Jesusland comments?

like i say. if kery won ohio none of his church-dynamiting, leninistic, firebreating, BS talk about jesusland would have happened. just look at the regan election and the clinton elections. there is no "jesusland".

this anti-south paranoa is foolish from a hisorical expreince/prespective. we cannot let stupid class wars devide us.

Not all Christians are jihadists [the liberal ones clearly are not],it's the fundementalists ones who are jiahdists and deserve to be called what they actually are.

Not all Christians are jihadists [the liberal ones clearly are not],it's the fundementalists ones who are jiahdists and deserve to be called what they actually are.

BULL****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :not:

Man, that's a big map. :hmm:


Not all Christians are jihadists [the liberal ones clearly are not],it's the fundementalists ones who are jiahdists and deserve to be called what they actually are.
If that were the case the radical left wouldn't be spouting crap about Jesusland. They've clearly equated a vote for Bush as a vote for religion.

I say the Jesusland talk is dead wrong, there is nothing "Jesus-like" about rabid right wing Bush supporters..

Instead, let's call it Satanland, since he seems to be the person they are trying to emulate.. ;)