This might sound conter-intuitive, but I feel there is a group of people in American politics who could be classified as extreme moderates.
Moderates often pride themselves on not being overly for or against one political wing or another. The biggest issue I have with extreme moderates their superiority complex. They feel that since they are somehow “impartial” they are closer to the truth and they see their steadfast refusal to acknowledge valid points made by either the right or the left as a virtue.
They will adamantly defend the notion that all points are equally valid, that all points of opinion should matter, that eventually they start denying fact in order to maintain their extreme moderatism. They live in a delusion where everything is equal.
For example, they will hold a fundamentalist preacher’s views on evolution as just as valid and worth considering as that of an evolutionary biologist. They will agree that the average Joe’s refusal to accept global warming is just as good as the mountains of peer reviewed research by climatologists the world over. Their delusion is not limited to just talking about facts, it also extends to generalizations.
A perfect example is the assassination attempt of Gabby Giffords. That murder attempt brought violence into the national spotlight, but the extreme moderates were quick to rush in and say “No no no! Conservatives don’t have a problem with violence! Liberals are just as violent! Everything’s equal, everything’s equal!!!”
Everything is not equal. The conservative movement does have more violent members than the liberal movement. I’m sorry if that makes you squirm. Liberals don’t murder abortion doctors, shoot up churches (Like the UU church in Tennessee), bring guns to rallies, put cross-hairs on political opponents, or use violent imagery in speeches and campaign messages.
The reality is that one person’s ignorance is not as valid as another person’s facts, but extreme moderates won’t let reality get in the way of maintaining their “impartiality.”
**On a side note, they piss me off just as much as those anti-ism people. “Oh, I don’t like to be classified so I try to ignore all “isms” No you idiot, you’re an anti-ismist! You can’t escape it! It’s how we communicate! You need words to convey ideas! If you have ideas, then there are words to describe those ideas. If you don’t agree with the whole definition of one particular ism or another, then say so! But to just flatly say “Oh, I’m beyond describing” is utterly pretentious and ridiculous.