CAUGHT BETWEEN TWO FIRES?

Do you know where your position is on the political map? Are you an extremist of the right or the left?Or do you feel that because of your predilection for seeing some good in varying points of view that you are a voter without a party? Follow this link : www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

and perhaps you will discover something about yourself.

Perhaps, like me, you will see what you already knew. I turned out to be a centrist, with a leaning toward the left. If you are a centrist check www.radicalmiddle.com/newswatch.htm
I like the quote I found there:

Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall catch hell from both sides.

........ found on the wall of Justice Chairman Burke Marshall, 1964

The lack of a political middle in American politics have left many voters floundering. Whatever the cause it is not just a political plot for it seems that many voters will not accept as their candidate any politician who does not espouse some extremist position from which they won't budge, whether it is "pro life" ("anti choice"?) or Stop the War Now. I think that it would be a blessing for this country if some politicians began to stick up for reason and moderation, instead of following the president and the party line. As a former president once said:


Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.
Theodore Roosevelt26th president of US (1858 - 1919)


So take the quiz just for fun, and if you have the time, make your opinions known here, even if they are extreme. The quiz page gives resources about all political complexions.

Am I Wrong?


Am I wrong or is freedom of speech a legitimate right as well as a fine thing for a people to have? I think I have heard that that is one of the things we are fighting for. Yet lately it seems that some Americans don't value it, at least for others. From reading and hearing the news lately I’m a bit confused because of conflicting and contradictory statements in the press, TV, and online, so would you help me out here?

I am going to list some of the things about freedom of speech that seem to be expressed in, say, the incident at Columbia University in connection to a speaker, Jim Gilchrist -- I believe he is the founder of the Minutemen, armed people who are guarding our border with Mexico in order to help stem the flow of illegitimate immigrants and who was invited by the Columbia College Republicans. Please read each statement and tell me if you think if you agree or disagree with any of them and I am right or wrong in my assumption that these are the points of view of activists and other students. Do any of them make any sense to you?

1. Those Minutemen are just plain ******* Nazis so a CC student has the right, even the responsibility to boo, yell, hold up signs, whatever, to let him know he’s not wanted here. We knew before he even started talking that it was all a lot of immigrant-hating stuff and we won't stand for that!

2. When he wouldn’t shut up what else could liberal, pro-immigration people do but rush the stage and wave signs in his face? He disrespected us!

3. When a press conference was held and some protesters were asked why we rushed the stage and stopped the event, one really quick-thinking girl said that we didn’t, that Gilchrist started the trouble first.

4. A legitimate protest was going on outside. Some of the protesters inside were asked why we didn’t join them, as we didn’t have to listen to what we don’t agree with. Well, we allowed the speaker to come here to speak and we had the right to speak when we didn’t like what he said.

5. Columbia University is a great institution of learning. If they are not teaching the student body civility and respect for a broad spectrum of ideas regarding legitimate behavior, they are failing their students, the students’ parents, and the expectations of American society. Students are just that -- they are enrolled in order to learn. They are exposed to a spectrum of ideas and they decide for themselves which they agree with. How can they learn critical thinking if they won't even listen to others' opinions?


Is freedom of speech a dying right if students are afraid to invite a speaker with strong, controversial opinions because violent, self-righteous "activists" will start a riot? Shouldn't the "activists" instead be planning their own event with a speaker they agree with, or back in the dorms studying? And here I've been thinking that we are starting to censor ourselves because of threats by terrorists to commit violence to people and property.

Am I wrong?