There is no ideology. What?
You didn't explain, Yankees. You talked wank. I'm sorry if I appear impatient, but frankly, you do little justice to our field. If British, German, Indian and American academics can discuss political ideologies with no misunderstanding, normative statements or cultural ambiguations, we - two graduates of the same discipline - should have no problem. We do, though, and I think it's because you're being silly.
Far Left <<<Liberalism<<<Moderates>>>Conservatives>>>Far Right
No.
It goes (if you're going to use the outmoded political spectrum thing):
Left --- Centre ---- Right
Socialist --- Liberal --- Conservative
A person 'between liberalism and conservatism' is not, necessarily or even incidentally, moderate. Thatcher was between liberalism and conservatism, she took the Conservative Party toward the centre (she made it more liberal). Was she moderate? Fuck no, she was as radical as Attila the Hun at the International Congress of Pacifists.
Dr Riley is wrong, anyway. One may be a radical conservative, a radical liberal, and depending on the socio-political context, conservatism or liberalism might be in themselves radical ideologies - in mediaeval England, for example, either would be. His piece read like something for A-level politics students, and my guess is it's from a textbook.
edit:
There is no ideology? My arse.