Procrustes Stretched
"intuition and imagination and intelligence"
gee...progressives on this thread are just as boorish and moronic as liberals....oh wait....they're both one and the same....
so says a favorite sock puppet
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
gee...progressives on this thread are just as boorish and moronic as liberals....oh wait....they're both one and the same....
Young people like the young motor cycle diaries Che.
Latino people like the conclusions he drew from his ride through South America.
Young people like the young motor cycle diaries Che.
Latino people like the conclusions he drew from his ride through South America.
Stupid young people and ignorant latinos do not know the real Che....he was an international terrorist and mass murderer.
180 DOCUMENTED VICTIMS OF CHÉ GUEVARA IN CUBA
I am a Proud Progessive and a Proud American. No one single pollitical party or political philosophy owns the right to be called "American" to the exclusion of others.
Before people start deciding is and/or is not "American" we need to remember that in the 1930's the only way to a "Good German" was to be a member of the Nazi Party.
Being Progressive does not diminish being an American any more than being a Conservative make one more of an American. It does however make us Americans.
If you're a Progressive in the true sense of the word, then you're about changing the Constitution, removing rights, which is exactly in line with whatever wannabe dictator needs to do.
Why in the world would anyone voluntarily want to remove what protects us from dictators?
What sets us apart, what keeps us free? If you want to live under tyranny there are plenty of countries already there.
You really need to learn what progressive means, along with communism, and marxism.
I will give you hint why you are very wrong, each other those in their true form would never have a dictatorship.
Young people like the young motor cycle diaries Che.
Latino people like the conclusions he drew from his ride through South America.
Stupid young people and ignorant latinos do not know the real Che....he was an international terrorist and mass murderer.
180 DOCUMENTED VICTIMS OF CHÉ GUEVARA IN CUBA
Can you be both a Progressive and an American?
Well, let’s see what Progressives believe, and see if you can subscribe…
1. The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution are founded on the idea that people are born with inalienable rights, given by one’s Creator, not by a legislative body or government that can decide which ones you have, and can remove them.
a. Not according to Progressives. Woodrow Wilson, of the Declaration of Independence, from “What is Progress?”
“Some citizens of this country never got beyond the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, July 4th, 1776….The Declaration of Independence did not mention the questions of our day. It is of no consequence to us unless we can translate its general terms into examples of the present day and substitute them in some vital way for the examples it itself gives…”
b. Wilson: “ the Constitution could be stripped off and thrown aside…”( Project MUSE - Journal of Policy History - Woodrow Wilson and a World Governed by Evolving Law Project MUSE Journals Journal of Policy History Volume 20, Number 1, 2008 Project MUSE - Journal of Policy History - Woodrow Wilson and a World Governed by Evolving Law
The Constitution stands in the way of the Progressives' agenda.
2. The founders believed in the sanctity of private property…but not Progressives:
a. Madison, 1792, said that ‘property’ included our natural rights, and the goal of government is the protection of property.
b. Woodrow Wilson, in his essay “Socialism and Democracy” said ‘Limitations of public authority must be put aside; the state may cross that boundary at will.’ The collective is not limited by individual rights.
3. How about the idea of checks and balances, you know, so that no one branch or individual accumulates too much power? Good idea or bad?
a.Federalist #10- checks and balances, to keep passions in check.
b. Tocqueville tells how centralization of power can lead to despotism. “Beware of government by experts and bureaucrats.”
c. Woodrow Wilson, in his essay “What is Progress?” Wilson compares the Founders ideas of checks and balances as the construction of a government as one would construct an orrery, a simple machine, based on immutable laws as in Newtonian physics, while he contends that government should conform to Darwin. “It is modified by its environment, necessitated by its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life. No living thing can have its organs offset against each other, as checks, and live.” See, Progressives want on separation or check on the power to do as they wish.
4. Progressives know how stupid the masses are, and that is why Progressive journalists editorialize instead of report the news… to tell you what you should think.
a. : “President Woodrow Wilson, a leading progressive, spoke often of his "vision," introducing a term that has now become central to our understanding of presidential politics. Wilson believed, as Kesler puts it, "that to become a leader you have to have a vision of the future and communicate that vision to the unanointed, mass public. You have to make them believe in your prophetic ability."
The Roots Of Liberalism - Forbes.com
b. Modern journalism is based on Progressives’ ideas: use the media to ‘teach’ people. Alter journalism from reporting facts to editorializing in the news, as the elites always know better. Walter Lippmann, Progressive (American newspaper commentator and author who in a 60-year career made himself one of the most widely respected political columnists in the world.)Public Opinion, “When properly deployed in the public interest, the manufacture of consent is useful and necessary for a cohesive society, because, in many cases, “the common interests” of the public are not obvious, and only become clear upon careful analysis of the collected data — a critical intellectual exercise in which most people either are uninterested or incapable of doing. Therefore, most people must have the world summarized for them, by the well-informed.” Public Opinion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
5.But that’s the ‘old time’ Progressive…not the current group. Right? Wrong.
a. Does President Obama believe in three separate branches of government? Well, Congress refused to pass his commission idea, so in the SOTU he said he’d just use executive order to create it. And he insisted that Congress overturn the Supreme Court decision…or, I guess, another executive order?
b. Ms. Clinton: “"I prefer the word ‘progressive,’ which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.” Hillary Clinton: I’m Not a Liberal
c. Axelrod claims the WH is Progressive:
Oh I've been learning what Progressive means, and once you do and then listen to Obama or Hillary or Michelle,
HILLARY CLINTON: "I prefer the word Progressive which has a real American meaning going back to the Progressive era at the beginning of the 20th Century. I consider myself a modern Progressive.
BARACK OBAMA: "You will carry on the best Progressive forward looking values of this proud commonwealth...," "Change has always come from places like Wisconsin, the State where the Progressive movement was born." He refers to Democrats as Progressives.
Bush said of the constitution, "It's just a goddamned piece of paper".
Article removed from our database
By DOUG THOMPSON
Dec 10, 2005, 06:02
Email this article
Printer friendly page
(Updated May 16, 2006)
The article that previously appeared under this URL has been removed from our database because a followup investigation revealed the sources quoted in the article did not, as they claimed, attend a White House meeting between President George W. Bush where we reported he called the Constitution a "god damned pieced of paper."
Although we believe President Bush has a history of flagrant disregard for the protections and liberties outlined in the Constitution, we cannot confirm that he made the statement and retract the article.
Our apologies to our readers. Our policies regarding the use of unnamed sources were changed in 2006 and the article would not have appeared on this web site under those new policies.
Progressive is a cover for their true Marxist beliefs, much like some Lib posters here pretending to be a Republican
\Progressives cannot be American in spirit as they have chosen to adopt a train of thought that runs counter to American philosophy . The idea that our rights are endowed upon us by our Creator also means we are a self policing populace that believes government should only intervene in our affairs in times of absolute neccesity , like in times of war or epidemics . Progressives believe In the "nanny state" and that is just simply unAmerican .
Can you be both a Progressive and an American?
Well, let’s see what Progressives believe, and see if you can subscribe…
1. The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution are founded on the idea that people are born with inalienable rights, given by one’s Creator, not by a legislative body or government that can decide which ones you have, and can remove them.
a. Not according to Progressives. Woodrow Wilson, of the Declaration of Independence, from “What is Progress?”
“Some citizens of this country never got beyond the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, July 4th, 1776….The Declaration of Independence did not mention the questions of our day. It is of no consequence to us unless we can translate its general terms into examples of the present day and substitute them in some vital way for the examples it itself gives…”
b. Wilson: “ the Constitution could be stripped off and thrown aside…”( Project MUSE - Journal of Policy History - Woodrow Wilson and a World Governed by Evolving Law Project MUSE Journals Journal of Policy History Volume 20, Number 1, 2008 Project MUSE - Journal of Policy History - Woodrow Wilson and a World Governed by Evolving Law
The Constitution stands in the way of the Progressives' agenda.
Sigh, and partisanship once again rears it's ugly head.
OK, first of all, Wilson's entire quote, in context, is:
"Justly revered as our great constitution is, it could be stripped off and thrown aside like a garment, and the nation would still stand forth in the living vestment of flesh and sinew, warm with the heart-blood of one people, ready to recreate constitutions and laws."
Which, when seen in context, obviously means that Americans are perfectly able to recreate the work of their founders, as there is an innate sense of of what is right and just in the American character. So that, even if every copy of the Constitution were somehow lost, we would survive as well as a nation.
And as far as the declaration comment goes, he was obviously saying that the laws that we live by must change to meet new technologies and circumstances. Which is of course what the founding fathers envisioned when they made the constitution a malleable document.
Attributing some sinister meaning to these quotes is absurd.
Not to mention that Woodrow Wilson made those quotes close to 100 years ago. He is not exactly an example of a modern progressive, now is he?
2. The founders believed in the sanctity of private property…but not Progressives:
a. Madison, 1792, said that ‘property’ included our natural rights, and the goal of government is the protection of property.
b. Woodrow Wilson, in his essay “Socialism and Democracy” said ‘Limitations of public authority must be put aside; the state may cross that boundary at will.’ The collective is not limited by individual rights.
Madison, contrary to popular conservative belief, was not the only "Founding Father". There were other founding fathers. Jefferson, for instance, thought that Corporations were an evil institution, as they allowed stockholders to be relatively free from liability.
And again, you are implying that Wilson is an example of a modern progressive.
That's like saying Theodore Roosevelt is a good example of a modern Conservative, and we all know that sure as hell isn't accurate.
Once again, see above. Wilson lived 100 years ago.
Hell, Lincoln centralized federal power much more than Wilson did. Shall we say that Lincoln is an example of a modern Conservative?
4. Progressives know how stupid the masses are, and that is why Progressive journalists editorialize instead of report the news… to tell you what you should think.
a. : “President Woodrow Wilson, a leading progressive, spoke often of his "vision," introducing a term that has now become central to our understanding of presidential politics. Wilson believed, as Kesler puts it, "that to become a leader you have to have a vision of the future and communicate that vision to the unanointed, mass public. You have to make them believe in your prophetic ability."
The Roots Of Liberalism - Forbes.com
b. Modern journalism is based on Progressives’ ideas: use the media to ‘teach’ people. Alter journalism from reporting facts to editorializing in the news, as the elites always know better. Walter Lippmann, Progressive (American newspaper commentator and author who in a 60-year career made himself one of the most widely respected political columnists in the world.)Public Opinion, “When properly deployed in the public interest, the manufacture of consent is useful and necessary for a cohesive society, because, in many cases, “the common interests” of the public are not obvious, and only become clear upon careful analysis of the collected data — a critical intellectual exercise in which most people either are uninterested or incapable of doing. Therefore, most people must have the world summarized for them, by the well-informed.” Public Opinion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And this is just complete blather, and revisionist history
First of all, yellow journalism shaping public opinion has existed for centuries, and was not a "Progressive" invention. Hearst, for instance, was surely not a "Progressive" in any way shape or form.
Secondly, modern opinion journalism was not a construct of any progressive movement, and was taken to the level that it is currently at by RUPERT MURDOCH, who is by no means a Progressive. Network television, pre-cable news network hardly had any editorializing.
Newspapers always kept their opinion columns separate from the News, and there was no question in general as to which was which. The Wall Street Journal did it the same way as the New York Times.
It is modern CONSERVATIVES that have caused the news and opinion to blend in the way they now do, NOT progressives.
5.But that’s the ‘old time’ Progressive…not the current group. Right? Wrong.
a. Does President Obama believe in three separate branches of government? Well, Congress refused to pass his commission idea, so in the SOTU he said he’d just use executive order to create it. And he insisted that Congress overturn the Supreme Court decision…or, I guess, another executive order?
b. Ms. Clinton: “"I prefer the word ‘progressive,’ which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.” Hillary Clinton: I’m Not a Liberal
c. Axelrod claims the WH is Progressive:
And most of this is not even worth responding to.
The president has every right to form a commission to look into a problem. It's not like said commission will have any power besides being advisory.
And he did not "insist" any Supreme Court decision be "Overturned".
The Constitution says, in Article II, Section 3, that the president shall "from time to time give to the Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."
Thus the actual wording Mr Obama used, in context has nothing to do with doing away with any separation of power, he said, specifically:
"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."
Thus he did not tell them to overturn the decision of the court, he told them that he would like them to make a law that deals with the problems that stem from the decision, which itself overturned 100 years of precedent.
I like Lord Buckley's hipster variation on that quote."Wherever you go, there you are" - Buddha
Young people like the young motor cycle diaries Che.
Latino people like the conclusions he drew from his ride through South America.
I would have to say yes because being an American just refers to your nation of origin and not your political beliefs.