Who says Scozzafava is a 'moderate' Republican?

Monte Kuligowski
The left has been defining the political debate in America for decades. The left frames an issue and often the right repeats the narrative, naively agreeing with the Democrats.

The most recent example comes out of the fiasco from NY-23. When Dede Scozzafava withdrew from New York’s 23rd, the New York Times ran a story titled, “G.O.P. Moderate, Pressed by Right, Abandons Race.”

That was the narrative. Scozzafava was a moderate Republican. Everyone in the so-called mainstream media agreed that she was a moderate Republican.

It’s beyond the scope of this piece to prove that Scozzafava is not a “moderate Republican.” But let me provide one paragraph from Michelle Malkin:

Scozzafava is an abortion rights advocate who favors gay marriage. It would be one thing if Scozzafava balanced that social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. But as a state assemblywoman, she voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against.

Before quoting a Republican leader referring to Scozzafava as a “moderate,” we might want to ask, Why would liberals refer to the Scozz as a “moderate?”

In context, “moderate” essentially means a fair-minded, reasonable, sensible, open-minded, balanced, temperate, judiciously wise liberal who happens to affiliate with the Republican Party. If only the Republican Party had more moderates!

By labeling Scozzafava as a moderate the left not only frames the debate, it creates the chart and draws the lines in the continuum of social acceptability. If Scozzafava is a moderate in the Republican Party, what is Rush Limbaugh?

Now you see how it works. In reality, Scozzafava might be a moderate in the Democrat Party, if not a lefty. But if she is accepted as a moderate in the Republican Party, then Glenn Beck is an evil extremist. There is no place left on the chart for those on the right except the “Mad Man” category -- as Time Magazine recently put it.

A piece titled, “Boehner stresses GOP big tent in wake of Scozzafava election shakeup,” from The Hill just a few days before the election, opens as follows:

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) shrugged off the notion Sunday that the Scozzafava shakeup in New York was a sign of growing backlash against moderates in the Republican Party while stressing the need to show conservative activists that the GOP was the party for them.

That’s unnecessarily confusing. You will notice that Scozzafava is lumped with moderates and apparently backlash against Democrats in elephants’ clothing is a bad thing.

It’s painful to read the following words of a so-called leader of the Republican Party:

“Clearly she [Scozzafava] would be on the left side of our party,” said Boehner, who had financially supported the campaign of the New York assemblywoman. ...We accept moderates in our party and we want moderates in our party.”

Mr. Boehner, if she would be on the left side of the party why then agree that she is a moderate? And why would you want “moderates” in the party if they will side with the most radical administration in the history of the United States? Would it be a good thing to vote with Obama, Reid and Pelosi?

Considering that 40% of Americans identify themselves as conservatives, and only 20% as liberals, maybe the Republican Party should change its strategy. Maybe the Republican leadership should define conservatism and promote conservative candidates.

The left has been defining the political debate in America for decades. The left frames an issue and often the right repeats the narrative, naively agreeing with the Democrats.

The most recent example comes out of the fiasco from NY-23. When Dede Scozzafava withdrew from New York’s 23rd, the New York Times ran a story titled, “G.O.P. Moderate, Pressed by Right, Abandons Race.”

That was the narrative. Scozzafava was a moderate Republican. Everyone in the so-called mainstream media agreed that she was a moderate Republican.

It’s beyond the scope of this piece to prove that Scozzafava is not a “moderate Republican.” But let me provide one paragraph from Michelle Malkin:

Scozzafava is an abortion rights advocate who favors gay marriage. It would be one thing if Scozzafava balanced that social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. But as a state assemblywoman, she voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against.

Before quoting a Republican leader referring to Scozzafava as a “moderate,” we might want to ask, Why would liberals refer to the Scozz as a “moderate?”

In context, “moderate” essentially means a fair-minded, reasonable, sensible, open-minded, balanced, temperate, judiciously wise liberal who happens to affiliate with the Republican Party. If only the Republican Party had more moderates!

By labeling Scozzafava as a moderate the left not only frames the debate, it creates the chart and draws the lines in the continuum of social acceptability. If Scozzafava is a moderate in the Republican Party, what is Rush Limbaugh?

Now you see how it works. In reality, Scozzafava might be a moderate in the Democrat Party, if not a lefty. But if she is accepted as a moderate in the Republican Party, then Glenn Beck is an evil extremist. There is no place left on the chart for those on the right except the “Mad Man” category -- as Time Magazine recently put it.

A piece titled, “Boehner stresses GOP big tent in wake of Scozzafava election shakeup,” from The Hill just a few days before the election, opens as follows:

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) shrugged off the notion Sunday that the Scozzafava shakeup in New York was a sign of growing backlash against moderates in the Republican Party while stressing the need to show conservative activists that the GOP was the party for them.

That’s unnecessarily confusing. You will notice that Scozzafava is lumped with moderates and apparently backlash against Democrats in elephants’ clothing is a bad thing.

It’s painful to read the following words of a so-called leader of the Republican Party:

“Clearly she [Scozzafava] would be on the left side of our party,” said Boehner, who had financially supported the campaign of the New York assemblywoman. ...We accept moderates in our party and we want moderates in our party.”

Mr. Boehner, if she would be on the left side of the party why then agree that she is a moderate? And why would you want “moderates” in the party if they will side with the most radical administration in the history of the United States? Would it be a good thing to vote with Obama, Reid and Pelosi?

Considering that 40% of Americans identify themselves as conservatives, and only 20% as liberals, maybe the Republican Party should change its strategy. Maybe the Republican leadership should define conservatism and promote conservative candidates.