I've never understood why 'progressive' was evil (unless we're talking the car insurance, in which case Flo is the Antichrist incarnate)  Isn't progressive the idea that we should make... progress.  I'd imagine most people like progress.  I guess some people want to keep the status quo. Mr. Rogers was a progressive for example, and I wouldn't consider him evil.  

 

Progressives are not evil, Liberals are not the enemy, to me the enemy is Authoritarians they come in both liberal and conservative dressing. 

---

Yes.

 

You are being about as thick headed about this as humanly possible. Other than being intentionally argumentative, is there a particularly reason you don't understand the simple premises I have laid out for you?

---

I thought Warren and Sanders wanted public funded campaigns that's a little different to me then contribution limits.

They do, that's the idea the progressives are proposing. 

---

Progressives are not evil, Liberals are not the enemy, to me the enemy is Authoritarians they come in both liberal and conservative dressing. 

Well check out Mr fence sitter over here trying to be all rational and self aware in his decision making. Pick a side already!  :teehee:

---

Progressives are not evil, Liberals are not the enemy, to me the enemy is Authoritarians they come in both liberal and conservative dressing. 

Yeah, but some treat progressives as if they're an inherently bad thing.  I'm sure that people sometimes use conservative in the same manner, but not to the same extent.   


Heck it's not as if 'liberal' and 'progressive' are even synonymous.  Progressives often just want change.  Things like taking money out of politics.  We don't think that money is speech, and we don't think corporations are people.  We think Citizens United was a sham.  Much like Sandra Day O'Connor and Rehnquist.  


Personally also feel that they got the Kelo case wrong too.  That was a decision by liberal justices.  (O'Connor and Rehnquist were dissenters on that one too.  Well O'Connor wasn't on the court at the time of Citizens United)

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Yeah, but some treat progressives as if they're an inherently bad thing.  I'm sure that people sometimes use conservative in the same manner, but not to the same extent.   


Heck it's not as if 'liberal' and 'progressive' are even synonymous.  Progressives often just want change.  Things like taking money out of politics.  We don't think that money is speech, and we don't think corporations are people.  We think Citizens United was a sham.  Much like Sandra Day O'Connor and Rehnquist.  


Personally also feel that they got the Kelo case wrong too.  That was a decision by liberal justices.  (O'Connor and Rehnquist were dissenters on that one too.  Well O'Connor wasn't on the court at the time of Citizens United)

Agreed, just like Libertarians are not synonymous with conservative. 

---

Yeah, but some treat progressives as if they're an inherently bad thing.  I'm sure that people sometimes use conservative in the same manner, but not to the same extent.   


Heck it's not as if 'liberal' and 'progressive' are even synonymous.  Progressives often just want change.  Things like taking money out of politics.  We don't think that money is speech, and we don't think corporations are people.  We think Citizens United was a sham.  Much like Sandra Day O'Connor and Rehnquist.  


Personally also feel that they got the Kelo case wrong too.  That was a decision by liberal justices.  (O'Connor and Rehnquist were dissenters on that one too.  Well O'Connor wasn't on the court at the time of Citizens United)

 

It's a false equivalency people on the right hear progressive or liberal they attach socialist to it, people on the left hear libertarian or conservative and they attach corporatist to it. Over coming THAT obstacle is the biggest challenge to any real change. It took me years to realize what I said before, progressives are not evil, liberals are not the enemy, it's authoritarians I oppose.

 

Now I still argue that leftist ideas lead to authoritarian regime's more often which is why I disagree with many of their policies but that doesn't make them the enemy. It makes them people I'm trying to convince that other ways are less likely to lead to authoritarian regime and achieve the same objective.

---

Unsustainable Federal Government is the most dangerous threat to our country, and it's not even close.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Unsustainable Federal Government is the most dangerous threat to our country, and it's not even close.

 

I'd like to add an Amen to that.

---

Not true re: liberals and so-called "progressives."  Liberals purposefully rebranded themselves as "progressive" after the term liberal had worn out its welcome.  Same will happen with "progressive" after folks realize it's the same old failed policy in a new dress.

 

Sure, people misuse labels all the time.  Progressive isn't really progressive, since it attempts to take us down old paths that we've moved on from in the past.  But it sounds cool.  It makes a nice fashion statement.  So, some may associate themselves with that term because the sound of it reflects their attitude instead of their true political feelings.  Maher likes to call himself Libertarian, but in reality he's anything but.  Ditto RINOs who claim to be conservative.  And leftys who think conservative is "backwards."  Au contraire, they are about preserving what is good about and what has proven to have worked in the past.  That's not backwards at all, that's learning from experience and history.  It's using common sense, no need to reinvent the wheel - just use it more innovative ways.  Do not throw the baby out with the bath water.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Not true re: liberals and so-called "progressives."  Liberals purposefully rebranded themselves as "progressive" after the term liberal had worn out its welcome.  Same will happen with "progressive" after folks realize it's the same old failed policy in a new dress.

 

Sure, people misuse labels all the time.  Progressive isn't really progressive, since it attempts to take us down old paths that we've moved on from in the past.  But it sounds cool.  It makes a nice fashion statement.  So, some may associate themselves with that term because the sound of it reflects their attitude instead of their true political feelings.  Maher likes to call himself Libertarian, but in reality he's anything but.  Ditto RINOs who claim to be conservative.  And leftys who think conservative is "backwards."  Au contraire, they are about preserving what is good about and what has proven to have worked in the past.  That's not backwards at all, that's learning from experience and history.  It's using common sense, no need to reinvent the wheel - just use it more innovative ways.  Do not throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

I found it laughable when Maher called himself a Libertarian, he basically just made the assumption pro-legal pot I must be a libertarian, it really exposed him as a fool speaking on things he has no knowledge of.

---

You are being about as thick headed about this as humanly possible. Other than being intentionally argumentative, is there a particularly reason you don't understand the simple premises I have laid out for you?

 

Just because a premise is simple doesn't make it true. The world has been down the "progressives" road before, and it didn't and cannot work. The basis of your premise denies the human condition. Warren and Sanders don't want money out of politics, they want to hamstring their opponents to achieve or retain power; just like every other politician on Earth. The minute they are in charge they will do the same things, ie increase the power of government, decrease the freedom of the populace, and assuage anyone necessary to retain their positions.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Not true re: liberals and so-called "progressives."  Liberals purposefully rebranded themselves as "progressive" after the term liberal had worn out its welcome.  Same will happen with "progressive" after folks realize it's the same old failed policy in a new dress.

 

Sure, people misuse labels all the time.  Progressive isn't really progressive, since it attempts to take us down old paths that we've moved on from in the past.  But it sounds cool.  It makes a nice fashion statement.  So, some may associate themselves with that term because the sound of it reflects their attitude instead of their true political feelings.  Maher likes to call himself Libertarian, but in reality he's anything but.  Ditto RINOs who claim to be conservative.  And leftys who think conservative is "backwards."  Au contraire, they are about preserving what is good about and what has proven to have worked in the past.  That's not backwards at all, that's learning from experience and history.  It's using common sense, no need to reinvent the wheel - just use it more innovative ways.  Do not throw the baby out with the bath water.

Respectfully disagree. There are plenty of areas progressives want to go that are new ideas for our country. At least ideas that have not been put into effect. Is Libertarian just a fancy fashion statement? 

---

Respectfully disagree. There are plenty of areas progressives want to go that are new ideas for our country. At least ideas that have not been put into effect. Is Libertarian just a fancy fashion statement? 

 

Why do you believe that history only exists in our country?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Just because a premise is simple doesn't make it true. The world has been down the "progressives" road before, and it didn't and cannot work. The basis of your premise denies the human condition. Warren and Sanders don't want money out of politics, they want to hamstring their opponents to achieve or retain power; just like every other politician on Earth. The minute they are in charge they will do the same things, ie increase the power of government, decrease the freedom of the populace, and assuage anyone necessary to retain their positions.

Citations please? Or, is this purely conjecture on your part as a rebuttal to non-conjecture on mine? No need to respond, it's quite obvious. 

 

Just because you or your leaders (obvious assumption is obvious) think this way does not mean everyone does. I chose to think that some do want to do good. 

---

Why do you believe that history only exists in our country?

Please read entire posts and use comprehension. 

---

Please read entire posts and use comprehension. 

 

I did. Progressive politics are old wine in new skins.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I did. Progressive politics are old wine in new skins.

Enjoy your southern strategy in your decaying wine skin then if thats how you feel.


Neither of your previous responses have any bearing on your original argument that what I said the progressive stance on money in politics is not true. If you think everyone is a liar then say that but don't try and say what progressives including myself say is not what we think. You clearly have no clue what is actualy being pushed.

---

Yep, it's a spending problem

 

 


$1.89T: Tax Revenue for FY15 Hit Record Through April--Gov't Runs $282B Deficit
 

Inflation-adjusted federal tax revenues hit a record $1,891,601,000,000 for the first seven months of the fiscal year this April, but the federal government still ran a $282,766,000,000 deficit during that time, according to the latest Monthly Treasury Statement.

 

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meye...2b-deficit

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

Yep, it's a spending problem

 

 

$1.89T: Tax Revenue for FY15 Hit Record Through April--Gov't Runs $282B Deficit
 

Inflation-adjusted federal tax revenues hit a record $1,891,601,000,000 for the first seven months of the fiscal year this April, but the federal government still ran a $282,766,000,000 deficit during that time, according to the latest Monthly Treasury Statement.

 

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meye...2b-deficit

 

I can't even keep up with the numbers anymore, I just do what I can and figure at some point the bottom falls out.

---