Can You Be Both An American and A Progressive?

[Father Time]

Can you engage in mud slinging and holier than though bullshitting and still be respected?

I'd hope not.

When the fuck did Wilson (or Hillary) become spokesperson for the progressives? Was there some press conference I missed?

 

[Father Time]

Can You Be Both An American and A Progressive?

As far as the general question posed, I'd say yes. Progressives measures were passed almost 100 years ago and the Constitution as well as the country as a whole is still here and pretty much intact despite bumps in the road, some major and some minor.


As far as specifics go, one point really caught my eye:

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.

I guess maybe a certain "Fair and Balanced" cable network has adopted progressive ideas, too, then.

Fox is the most trusted television news network in the country, according to a new poll out Tuesday.
A Public Policy Polling nationwide survey of 1,151 registered voters Jan. 18-19 found that 49 percent of Americans trusted Fox News, 10 percentage points more than any other network.
Thirty-seven percent said they didn’t trust Fox, also the lowest level of distrust that any of the networks recorded.


Read more: Poll: Fox most trusted name in news - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com

Who cares, that says absolutely nothing about how much people should trust them.

 

[Vast LWC]

Wow, so all of you right-winger types take heed from "gautama"...

You too might become an insane conspiracy theorist moron like him if you go too far down the path that Glenn Beck starts you on.

But don't think that you're immune my fellow lefties. Extremist conspiracy theories are a bi-partisan phenomenon.

 

[Article 15]

Wow, so all of you right-winger types take heed from "gautama"...

You too might become an insane conspiracy theorist moron like him if you go too far down the path that Glenn Beck starts you on.

But don't think that you're immune my fellow lefties. Extremist conspiracy theories are a bi-partisan phenomenon.

Pffft!

We are just now unchaining ourselves from the Theocracy BOOOOOSH created.

 

[Article 15]

BTW gautama is easily my favorite RWL on the board.

 

[Father Time]

Look around you. Che is on more clothing and jewelry than Calvin Klein.
Seeing as Che is not a designer, why would people like to have his image on their clothing?

Because they're idiot kids who think that they're somehow sticking it to the man by wearing an ironic t-shirt.

If you check their closets, they probable have a few with pictures of Charles Manson, too.

Many of them are Democrats who sing the praises of Obama, which tells you everything you need to know.

Actually most of them are clueless about political parties..

But yes, they are kids.

And so yes, we should be a little concerned...or ignore it as we did with other things that "surprised us" such as Columbine, Underwear bomber, etc.

Exactluy when do you say to yourself..."this can only lead to something bad"....after it happens?

And what stupid scapegoat do you want to blame Columbine for? Those kids had mental problems which have been documented plenty of times.

 

[Father Time]

Wow, so all of you right-winger types take heed from "gautama"...

You too might become an insane conspiracy theorist moron like him if you go too far down the path that Glenn Beck starts you on.

But don't think that you're immune my fellow lefties. Extremist conspiracy theories are a bi-partisan phenomenon.

I follow Occam's Razor and the saying 'never ascribe to malice that which can easily be explained by incompetence'.

SO yeah I don't believe most things that sound like conspiracies.

 

[Father Time]

You're comparing stupid kids wearing Che shirts to a terrorist attack?

Exactluy when do you say to yourself..."this can only lead to something bad"

When stupid people start trying to base national policies on a book that praises genocide and the massacre of children, I worry.

Also when any politician starts spouting neoKeyensian bullshit or implying that we'll have a smaller target on our back if we invade a few more countries.

I compared the kids to terrorists?

Instead, I compared kids to.....uh.....kids (Columbine).

Please...sit back and "dont care" when schools suspend a kid for wearing an American flag t-shirt, but do not suspend them for wearing an image of Che on a t-shirt.

Back at Columbine, teachers did not think it was any big deal that those boys were wearing strange clothing (gothic..and yes, now even MORE prevelant).

My God teens wearing strange clothing, what a new phenomenon, clearly this is sufficient evidence that they are potential murderers.

 

[Kalam]

Can you be both an American and a progressive? Without reading the OP, my guess is "no."

The suggestion that "American" implies a certain political affiliation is as ludicrous as the suggestion that Senator McCarthy wasn't a worthless drunk.

 

[gautama]

BTW gautama is easily my favorite RWL on the board.

Article 15 i.e., Minor Military Crook,

With your record as a dedicated LIEberal and/or Obamarrhoid, I am most pleased with your opinion.

 

[gautama]

Can you be both an American and a progressive? Without reading the OP, my guess is "no."

The suggestion that "American" implies a certain political affiliation is as ludicrous as the suggestion that Senator McCarthy wasn't a worthless drunk.

The IslamoFascist Pigshit's opinion re Sen McCarthy who turned out to be more prescient than wrong is erroneous.

But for once (as far as I know) this Swine's spawn is correct in that one cannot be both an American and a "progressive".

BTW, I hate that the Despicable and Corrupt Dems always get away with terms that are opposite to their nature.....such as "BLUE" states, when in common parlance "RED" , or "COMMIE" states are more suitable. And, certainly "PROGRESSIVES", a term with a positive connotation, is absolutely NOT apropos for an Historically Defunct MARXIST party of Obamarrhoidal turds.

 

[Vel]

While they might be considered Americans, I don't think that they're what the founding fathers were hoping for when they conceived the idea for this nation. It seems to me that progressives often consider themselves to be world citizens that happen to have the misfortune to be born in the horrible USA.

People change. Times change. "Born in the horrible USA." Hmmmm. Are you referring to intellectualism? The desire to improve ourselves in every possible way?

We're not perfect (USA). No one is. So what is it that you want? Regression? Are you speaking of following the US Constitution to the letter? If that's the case, then I think that both parties and all political beliefs have fudged on the constitution. The wiretaps? The inability for several years for those who were unable to voice their disapproval of infringement on the bill of rights. Loosely the 4th and 1st amendments.

So elaborate on what our founding fathers hoped for...over 200 years ago? Repeal women's suffrage? Slave ownership? What do you want?

LOL You seem to be experiencing difficulty focusing. I have to say, if your post is what passes as intellectualism to you, then you might want to look into furthering your education. My post was fairly concise and easy to understand. I didn't say I wanted anything. I posted an OPINION. Reading comprehension is a wonderful tool that you would do well to utilize.

 

[gautama]

Wow, so all of you right-winger types take heed from "gautama"...

You too might become an insane conspiracy theorist moron like him if you go too far down the path that Glenn Beck starts you on.

But don't think that you're immune my fellow lefties. Extremist conspiracy theories are a bi-partisan phenomenon.

LeftyWhackjobCrunt is an Obamarrhoidal Fool.......waddaya can expect from a Marxist POS ?

 

[gautama]

CAN YOU BOTH BE AN AMERICAN AND A PROGRESSIVE?

One is geography, the other philosophy. I don't see why not.

In the narrowest of interpretations, you are correct.

But, then, you miss the answer to the question the questioner asked.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Can you be PC and make an intelligent thread?

 

[gautama]

Can you be PC and make an intelligent thread?

Can a monkey play mozart ?

Fucking idiot.

 

[gautama]

"Debates are like merry go rounds

Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in."

That part is true.

"The difference is that merry-go-rounds are generally fun and entertaining."

Only if you have the political mind of a lobotomized 4 yr old, i.e., Father Time.

 

[MarcATL]

An here are attempting a shot at the OP...

Thank you.

There are Progressives in both parties.

To expand on the OP, the term 'American' is here used to define those who believe:
1. are born with inalienable rights, given by their Creator...not by any government or law.
This is at variance to the European view, expressed by Progressives.

2. That separation of powers is commendable, and so is the system of checks and balances in our Constitution. This is not the view of Progressives, early and late, who see same as an impediment to rapid change, and total control of the lives of citizens.

3. The rule of law and of property rights are inherent in the American system, and are not malleable to the whims of government. This is not the view of Progressives.

4. Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution are outdated. This is not the view of Progressives.

5. As you would like to bring liberal- conservative into the discussion, clearlly conservatives fall within the parameters of my definition. Liberals are to a great degree Progressives. John Dewey, another Progressive, co-opted the term Liberal when there was a negative reaction to 'Progressive.'

"Being Progressive does not diminish being an American any more than being a Conservative make one more of an American."
If you accept the above, you are most certainly wrong.


I am certainly willing to agree with you about being a good American if you mean that you wish to call yourself liberal or progressive, but feel as I do about the Declaration and the Constitution.

The word matters less than the view.

What were these document's stance on blacks in America?

A certain concept regarding 3/5ths of a person comes to mind.

This is what you want...right?

Let us not lose our senses to document worship...shall we?

 

[editec]

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:

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j4PxJ4uH-t4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j4PxJ4uH-t4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Oh?

Is Progressive the new boogieman word that the partisan idiots are going to demonize next?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am convinced, this country is in the "Dim Ages".

The polarization of our political parties have divided opinions and facts so far apart that neither side is right or wrong.

The simple fact is, if you are an American, then you are. You opinions and beliefs do not make you un-American. Extremists may say you are but you are not. Extremists have an extreme view. Skin heads, the KKK and the Nazis say the same general things. They have a right to their opinions but they carry no weight.

Political Chick is nothing more than an extreme opinion. Thats okay, I can respect that. Her opinion is just that, an opinion. Its extreme, thats why it raises your eyes. If a party has this on their platform then they wont get elected, simple as that. The moderates dont elect extremists, they elect people like Obama or almost Mccain who the republican party held in disdain for years. Ironic.

Political Chick, I enjoy reading your posts for the entertainment factor.

I like the analysis.

Neat, sweet, succinct.