So what's the difference between a moderate Democrat and a moderate Republican?

Palin is probably a bad example to select because it is somewhat difficult to define her 'views' but on the other hand, maybe that makes her a perfect example because that is so representative of 'extreme' right wing US fanaticism. When it comes to defining fascism, scholars seem to agree most that fascism is exceptionally difficult to define but one of the attributes on which they appear to agree is sentimentality for social Darwinism without solid universal principles and that is the hallmark of current US right wing extremism: by suggestive appearances, they want to dissolve unemployment benefits, social security, medicare and food stamps but to the best of my knowledge, none of them openly say so in so many words. Like Mussolini and Hitler, US right wing extremists appeal to sentimental impulses to reward the 'strong' and punish the 'weak and degenerate' for ruining the economy, the nation, the 'purity' of the people and wounding national 'pride'.

The vote that will place these people in power is the angry and resentful 'revenge' vote, and the only satisfaction such candidates might provide is either honest centrist policies that work or reward for the 'strong' financed by punishment of the 'weak'. It is a dangerous and potentially violent game based on blind trust in the intentions of candidates running on vague sentimental appeals and that is what makes it 'extreme'. As far as the 'difference' between 'extreme' and 'moderate' conservatism, as far as I am concerned, there is no difference and never has been.

It is all the same social Darwinism and antisocial morbid self-centricity, the 'extreme' element presents the agenda with more hysterical theatrics, more flamboyantly threatening and suggestively violent rhetoric but the agenda is the same. In my humble opinion what we are currently observing is not a sudden surge of extremism within a party but simply a sudden surge of honesty about what has always been a hostile, threatening, antisocial and suggestively violent ideology. That is the 'difference': the hostile, threatening, antisocial violent element is more honest than the rest of their associates.

EDIT cases in point (because us whacked out communists always have to prove all our assertions): Comments from other respondents include "(extremists are) completely American" (not really sure what that means but it's some real sweet and crunchy gratuitous sentiment, isn't it?) "Extreme republicans will beat up illegals who rape liberals" (Aw shucks, isn't that precious? You see, violence is actually good for us and us subhuman liberals don't even show any appreciation.) ... and this gem: "There are no extremist Republicans- only much needed true conservatives. The extremists are Liberals.

America is a center-right country. To move to an extreme position from center/right, you have to be far left." (Right wingers are "true conservatives". Only left is 'extreme', it is impossible to be right AND 'extreme'.

America is what I TELL you it is and if you disagree, you are WRONG.) They don't really know for sure what they want, but they know who they hate and who they want to hurt, don't they? These are textbook fascists eager to select and rally around their 'strong man', punish the weak and reprobate degenerates that compromised the purity and pride of their nation then advance their 'strength' through a Darwinian program of manufactured conflict.

What makes Sarah extreme is her rhetoric. For example, a moderate talks about working with other moderates to compromise in order to solve problems. Sarah is all talking about the party of "Hell no!"

Sadly if she really wanted to do something worth while, then she could have built a movement around Centrism. She could have easily captured the center of both parties as well as the majority of independents. Even I had hoped that after the '08 campaign that she would have reached out across this political divide, instead she chose to wedge this nation farther apart.

She's not the brightest crayon in the box, but she could have been the boldest.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.