The Four Pillars of Progressivism

[IResist]

"3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

Once again a woe is me attitude of conservative Christians. They often do not espouse the morality they preach and often restrict some freedoms. We don't rip morality out of schools. We keep church and state separate. Kids can pray in school. There just cannot be mandated school wide prayer. Just like the Bible cannot be taught in public schools. It goes to show that the problem isn't indoctrination, it's what the content of said indoctrination is. You may think that being gay is a sin, but just remember that according to your book, everybody else is, too.

 

[Pogo]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

OK I was invited to comment on this so I'll make it real quick.

The Progressive Era was going on a hundred years ago and usually dated roughly 1890 to 1920. It's long gone. And you don't get to recycle old labels into new definitions just because you have a label-hanging obsession and can't think of a new one. There's no such thing as a "Progressive" in contemporary terms, unless you're talking about an insurance policy. Therefore everything you wrote in description of it is a complete waste of time.

My work is done.

/thread

 

[eflatminor]

Equality is the best foundation for a civilized society.

Equality of outcome or equality of opportunity?

If the former, you are not a liberal, you are a leftist. If the latter, yes, you are indeed a liberal.

Big damn difference, so I'm curious, which is it?

Equality under the law, equal opportunity. Everyone is responsible for their own outcomes. I don't know of any prominent person on the left nor have I heard any liberal support equality of outcomes. I think that is a right-wing radio thing.

Leave your right-wing labels alone. They don't apply.

I care not for labels, but I do care for accuracy and transparency.

Unless you and I have a very different definition for 'person on the left', I would argue leftists most certainly support equality of outcome. Welfare, in all it's forms, is designed to improve the outcome of chosen citizens. Equality of outcome is absolutely positively what things like affirmative action and protected classes are all about. The examples after over 100 years of progressive meddling are abundant, at local, state and federal levels, but at the end of the day, they're case for forcing wealth from some is that we should benefit others, to improve their outcome.

As one of the guys that pays the vast majority of those taxes, it sure as hell isn't improving outcome. That's government acting unequally.

Lastly, I assure you this hard core classical liberal / libertarian has PLENTY of issues with what you think of as 'right wing'.

I think welfare is designed to assist those in need. Period. The outcomes of those who receive it vary and depends on how that individual chooses to do with it and to get off it. Welfare doesn't last forever. All of this is the result of your fellow citizens enacting it through their duly elected representatives.

Affirmative action is an attempt by citizens to use the power of a duly elected government to level an uneven playing field for minorities and women who have been historically discriminated against.

Protected classes, as you call them, is an attempt by citizens through the power of laws enacted by their elected representatives to protect those who are vulnerable from those who would exploit that vulnerability. Discrimination against women, homosexuals, blacks, latinos, Jews, the handicapped is morally wrong and undermines our society.

Taxpayers all have some grievance about how their taxes are spent. Your grievance is no more valid or special than anyone else's.

I'm afraid you've failed to refute that the ideology you espouse produces equality of outcome. If you have two guys in a room, one with $1 and one with $10, and you take $3 from the rich guy and give it to the poor guy, you've made them more equal. Their outcomes have been altered, not because they had equal opportunity, but because of your laws.

What you stated above are the intentions behind those programs, how they were sold to the public. The reality is you improve the lives of some while diminishing that of others. I don't care what you say you value, the effect of this is to make us more equal through force of law. That is exactly the opposite of what was intended when we found the country, which was the government enforces equality of opportunity. Your outcome is up to you.

But that is simply how I define a leftist.

Much more importantly, your programs require theft, enforced by armed government agents. You force people in certain industries to labor on your behalf, without their direct consent. That is at least indentured servitude. Your programs are deeply immoral and that is the real reason why they must be resisted.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

• The distrust of concentrated wealth and power in the hands of corporate oligarchy or aristocracy.
  
• Strong proponents of workplace regulations and the living wage.
  
• Environmental stewardship.
  
• Equality for all citizens, civil rights, and social justice.
  
• Investing in America

1- Unless it's the government family you like such as the Clinton's. Then you're fine with it. We said no more Bush's and meant it. You would never say that about the Clinton's, or Kennedy's etc. So that point is bullshit.
2- Some regulation in order to promote safety is ok. You idiot's trying to make wages what you arbitrarily think they should be is stupid. The more you regulate and demand wage floors the worse you make things not only for the business but you actually cause the person you claim to be helping to lose any chance at an income.
3- You have equality and civil rights. Fuck off with your social justice. That's retard territory.
4- Invest for sure. Invest in the best military in the world, invest in protecting our borders and invest in keeping illegals out of here. Let's also invest in not letting any terrorists in the country. Let's invest in making sure those that come here are able to support themselves and really want to be citizens. Let's not invest in those that don't want to do that.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

OK I was invited to comment on this so I'll make it real quick.

The Progressive Era was going on a hundred years ago and usually dated roughly 1890 to 1920. It's long gone. And you don't get to recycle old labels into new definitions just because you have a label-hanging obsession and can't think of a new one. There's no such thing as a "Progressive" in contemporary terms, unless you're talking about an insurance policy. Therefore everything you wrote in description of it is a complete waste of time.

My work is done.

/thread

You shoulda passed on the invite.

 

[eflatminor]

Equality is the best foundation for a civilized society.

Equality of outcome or equality of opportunity?

If the former, you are not a liberal, you are a leftist. If the latter, yes, you are indeed a liberal.

Hyped-Up Hypocrisy

Conservatives want a society based on birth, not worth. Cut off your sons and daughters at age 18 and make them work their way through college, just like you tell us to, or you have nothing to say to the 99%.

Wow are you off base. This libertarian places no value on birth. For that matter, neither do any conservatives I've met..

I left home a few days before my 18th birthday. Cut off and working my way through college. .

A Pulpit Is for Bullies

Terminal America is controlled by unearned birth privileges and, in your case, brownnosing. Not brains, who should be recruited and offered more than they can expect to make anywhere else from the ages of 18 to 22. If college students aren't paid a salary, they aren't worth anything. They have no self-respect, conforming to rules set by those who demand they humiliate themselves in order to make the rich richer.

Hypocritical Libretardians believe in the privilege of the rich to give their brats an adult allowance and paid-up tuition. So you class-climbers are scabs who force everyone else to "work their way through college," which implies that college isn't work and that students shouldn't be paid. You want us to feel sorry for your sacrifice, which has no merit and nothing to do with qualifying you for a job. Yet the plutocratic "Atlases" who mandate this indentured servitude don't practice what they preach.

Couldn't...take...all...the...logical...fallacies.

Ignored.

 

[danielpalos]

Equality is the best foundation for a civilized society.

Equality of outcome or equality of opportunity?

If the former, you are not a liberal, you are a leftist. If the latter, yes, you are indeed a liberal.

Big damn difference, so I'm curious, which is it?

Equality under the law, equal opportunity. Everyone is responsible for their own outcomes. I don't know of any prominent person on the left nor have I heard any liberal support equality of outcomes. I think that is a right-wing radio thing.

Leave your right-wing labels alone. They don't apply.

I care not for labels, but I do care for accuracy and transparency.

Unless you and I have a very different definition for 'person on the left', I would argue leftists most certainly support equality of outcome. Welfare, in all it's forms, is designed to improve the outcome of chosen citizens. Equality of outcome is absolutely positively what things like affirmative action and protected classes are all about. The examples after over 100 years of progressive meddling are abundant, at local, state and federal levels, but at the end of the day, they're case for forcing wealth from some is that we should benefit others, to improve their outcome.

As one of the guys that pays the vast majority of those taxes, it sure as hell isn't improving outcome. That's government acting unequally.

Lastly, I assure you this hard core classical liberal / libertarian has PLENTY of issues with what you think of as 'right wing'.

I would argue that the right wing, simply cannot tell the difference.

It is not about, "equality of outcome"; that is simply the right wing, claiming learning how to fish is more important than learning capital management, but having nothing but Red Herrings, to show for it.

Welfare is a social safety net.

A capital gains tax preference, is supposed to be a rational choice to help create, Jobs Booms.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Ok, so if it was unconstitutional why is it still in force?

the SC ruled it constitutional. they have the final say on such things. so at the moment it is constitutional by definition. However, as I said, that is being fixed.

Providing for the General welfare, not the Common welfare, is in our Constitution, right wingers.

actually the word is "promote" the general welfare, not "provide". Big difference.

Please stop.

GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE. Article I, section 8 of the U. S. Constitution grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the United States."

read the preamble and get back to me,

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/General+Welfare

Nullify Whatever Leads to Anti-Majority Legislation

The only part that is valid is "We, the People," except that it turned out to really mean "We, the lawyers for the 1% devising this scheme at the Constitutional Convention."

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The 17th Amendment was the biggest coup d'etat for the progressive movement. Repeal it, and you may slow the inevitable advancement of liberalism and an ever bigger central government.

Trickle-Down Representation

So that we are represented in Washington by the will of the ruling class's lowlife crooks in the state legislature? People are smart enough to see through what you're trying to pull by canceling our right to vote for our U.S. Senators.

I'm talking about return the balance of power between state and federal government, you know, the way guys like James Madison intended. I'll take his opinion over yours any day. I understand that those who prefer a large central government along with a more broadly socialistic government disagree with the states having any say at the federal level. It's clear the consensus of our founding fathers was much different than your opinion.

Madison believed the Senate should be a method of connecting state and national government. Therefore, he proposed that senators be voted in by the House of Representatives in order to keep the senate exclusive to a well selected and qualified group of individuals while also effectively linking the two government groups.However, In today's government senators of each state are elected through popular vote by the residents of each state.

James Madison- Fedralist Paper #62-
Another advantage accruing from this ingredient in the constitution of the Senate is, the additional impediment it must prove against improper acts of legislation. No law or resolution can now be passed without the concurrence, first, of a majority of the people, and then, of a majority of the States. It must be acknowledged that this complicated check on legislation may in some instances be injurious as well as beneficial; and that the peculiar defense which it involves in favor of the smaller States, would be more rational, if any interests common to them, and distinct from those of the other States, would otherwise be exposed to peculiar danger. But as the larger States will always be able, by their power over the supplies, to defeat unreasonable exertions of this prerogative of the lesser States, and as the faculty and excess of law-making seem to be the diseases to which our governments are most liable, it is not impossible that this part of the Constitution may be more convenient in practice than it appears to many in contemplation.

Barney Fife Madison

Dolley's lapdog Jemmy was a short person who wanted to imagine himself as towering over the voters as he stood with his fellow elevated politicians, counting as giants even those in the state legislatures. That's why he opposed direct election of Senators.

you still have to deal with all the other founders who signed on to the system. .

The Bigger They Come, the Harder They Fall

If you say so. Only authoritarian wannabe Bigshot bullies tell me what secular gods of yours I have to deal with.

 

[Pogo]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

OK I was invited to comment on this so I'll make it real quick.

The Progressive Era was going on a hundred years ago and usually dated roughly 1890 to 1920. It's long gone. And you don't get to recycle old labels into new definitions just because you have a label-hanging obsession and can't think of a new one. There's no such thing as a "Progressive" in contemporary terms, unless you're talking about an insurance policy. Therefore everything you wrote in description of it is a complete waste of time.

My work is done.

/thread

You shoulda passed on the invite.

Probably so, but you never know when pointing out the facts is going to finally sink in, so I invested a post. Because I'm a giver.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

JFK would oppose Medicaid, Medicare, SS?

republicans today don't oppose Medicaid, medicare and SS. WTF is wrong with you?

Oh so the Republicans are fully on board 3 of the biggest socialist institutions in America?

I guess that's what I mean when I say that liberalism always wins in the long run, isn't it?

medicare and SS are funded by working people. Its their money that is being returned to them when they need it. Medicaid is to cover the medical needs of those who cannot afford their care.

Those are not liberal programs.

But continual deficit spending is a liberal program (done by both parties) and it always results in countries failing.

Liberalism always fails, always has, always will. Because it is based on a false premise----------------that there is an unending supply of money for the government to pass out.

They're not liberal? lol. well look at all these conservatives vehemently opposing them.

Talking Points Memo

I think for myself and you repeat what is drummed into your small head by the left wing BS merchants.

The Specious Spectrum

You're asking us whether we want to be punched in the jaw by the Left fist or the Right fist of an ambidextrous heavyweight champion.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What if taxpayers were allowed to put on their 1040s what percentage of their taxes should go to each government- spending sector? Those who wanted to destroy Islam could assign 100% of their taxes to the Defense Department; a feralphile could pay for welfare moochers with his own money, not ours.

On a side note - After 8 years of progressivism in the WH, 8 years of progressive leadership in the Senate, and 4 years of Pelosi leadership in the House - income inequality/disparity, one of Holy Grails of the movement - decreased considerably! j/k no, it didn't.

Kennedys = Bushes

That was by design. The born-rich leaders on both fake sides want to destroy the middle class, the Right from Wall Street down and the Left from the ghetto up. The Right secretly believes, "I've got mine, and I'm not going to let you get yours," while the Left preaches, "I've got mine, and I'm going to give yours away."

Our received political ideas remind me of a cartoon about a medieval battle where the two sides' flags were exactly the same. But if you looked at the stick-figure emblem from right to left, it was a duck; from left to right, it was a rabbit.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The 17th Amendment was the biggest coup d'etat for the progressive movement. Repeal it, and you may slow the inevitable advancement of liberalism and an ever bigger central government.

The 17th Amendment happened because people were tired of the corrupt buffoons that the state legislatures kept sending to washington.

We were quite capable of selecting our own corrupt buffoons.

The Founding Fathers would disagree. They did not want a direct democracy, rather, they wanted a mix.

This is why the House was directly elected by the people and why those in the Senate were selected by state governments.

Just see how the Founding Fathers valued direct democracy verses representation. Those in the House were only given 2 years to serve and those in the Senate were given 6 years to serve. In addition, there are only 2 Senators per state verses a myriad in the House. So I ask you, how much confidence did the Founding Fathers have with direct voting from the people to elect suitable candidates vs. those in state government? Obviously they trusted the states to pick better representatives.

Of course, Progs would scoff at this and refer to the US government in the same breath as a democracy. Well guess what, the US is a Republic, not a democracy. The Founding Fathers knew better than to create a direct democracy.

Every Media Mouthpiece for the 1% Can Go Eat a Knuckle Sandwich

You political bullies want us to worship the Constitution the way Fundamentalists worship the Bible or Koran. You want us to take the words of the Federalists as infallible Gospel inspired by God. The Founding Fodder, lawyers for the 1% working behind closed doors, established a theocracy with the political class and its owners as imams Real men make their own laws and spit at your insulting accusations about "mob rule, two wolves and a sheep," and all those talking points preached by conceited blowhards.

I grow weary of Progs trashing the Founding Fathers


Just say that you have no respect for the Constitution or the Founding Fathers. .

Kochist Cavalcade of Clowns Tooting Kazoos

I grow weary of Birchers calling everybody who disagrees with them some kind of Leftist. You're losing the independents and populists with that attitude. The real Founding Fathers were the frontiersmen like Daniel Boone, not those Wags Wearing Wigs you foaming-at-the-mouth fanatics are trying to force us to worship.

 

[Dragonlady]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

More idiot conservatives pretending to understand what liberals want:

1. Equal rights for all - men, women, white, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims Christians, gays, straights, not just white Christian males - all legal citizens. You know that part of the Pledge of Allegiance "with liberty and justice for all", not just straight white males.

2. A quality public education system - you want "choice" in education, then go to a private school. This patchwork of public schools, charter schools and home schooling is not working. In fact, American education was ranked higher when there was no such "choice". Charter school vouchers simply skim the best students and funding from public schools and don't deliver a better education, they just take the best students.

3. Equal opportunity - for everyone. Same as equality, in jobs, schools, and other opportunities. Conservatives hate affirmative action for non-whites, but what are "legacy" admissions but affirmative action for rich whites who make up the bulk of the graduates of Ivy League schools. These kids are NOT getting in on their merits either.

When it comes to hiring, it would be interesting to see a truly "blind test". Recruiters would be given resumees which contain no personal information about the applicant - name, sex, address, only their skills and work history. Interviews would be similary blind - done via electronic communications - questions and answers. The HR people pick their hires, and see who wins.

Now I know that there is more to the hiring process than skills and work history, there's also whether or not the person will be a good "fit" with the existing staff. I believe such a test will reveal how deep these biases and prejudices are. That really well qualified women and/or minorities are routinely being passed over in favour of less qualifed white males and will be really eye-opening for the public at large.

4. Reduced military spending. Every conservative should be forced to read a detailed history of the rise and fall of Rome. There are dangerous parallels going on here. Both the corrupting influence of lobbying, and the corruptability of a government dependant on senators raising massive amounts of funds.

The costs of Rome's standing armies was a huge fianancial drain on the economy of the city. Initially only Romans, were allowed to serve but as Rome conquered most of the known world at the time, there weren't enough Romans to fill the need. So non-citizens were recruited. Each soldier was promised an acre of land in Rome on retirement. Non-citizens were promised citizenship. But eventually there was no land left in Rome to give them, so soldiers were encouraged to retire where they were last stationed, because it would be easier to give them that one acre in the conquered lands.

Armies were lead by consuls who paid their own troops. Conquering new lands was one way of doing it. The captured wealth could then be used to pay the troops (after the requisite tribute was sent to Rome).

Last but not least, Senators were expected to provide "games" for the people of Rome - gladiators, lions, chariot races, and other entertainments. This would ensure their re-election, but such games were expensive, so they had "sponsors". Knights (people of the business class), who sought passage of favourable legislation, who would bankroll the Senators to get their laws passed.

When the democracy of the elections was abolished and the leaders of the city became "Emperors", the city's decline was inevitable. Previously, the elites considered it a sacred duty to serve as the "First Man of Rome", but eventually it became a naked power grab, which those in power used to line their own pockets.

If any of this sounds familiar, you would be correct.

 

[SeaGal]

Kennedys = Bushes

That was by design. The born-rich leaders on both fake sides want to destroy the middle class, the Right from Wall Street down and the Left from the ghetto up. The Right secretly believes, "I've got mine, and I'm not going to let you get yours," while the Left preaches, "I've got mine, and I'm going to give yours away."

Our received political ideas remind me of a cartoon about a medieval battle where the two sides' flags were exactly the same. But if you looked at the stick-figure emblem from right to left, it was a duck; from left to right, it was a rabbit.

It's ever been thus.

Our form of government was designed to mitigate the influence, corruption and ruling whims of the powerful such as we've seen in monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies. The hope was that by spreading the power, giving the people a voice, power in the hands of a few would be diluted...(that hope depended upon us paying attention). But it has stood us in good stead, for the most part. We win some, we lose some.

You know, publicly and loudly arguing politics while making dire predictions about the 'other' side is a time honored American tradition. It's the stuff of town squares and checkerboards. The language is certainly fouler than it once was - and there is anonymity in online conversations, which allows some to be less responsible or less respectful than they might normally be.

 

[Pogo]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

More idiot conservatives pretending to understand what liberals want:

1. Equal rights for all - men, women, white, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims Christians, gays, straights, not just white Christian males - all legal citizens. You know that part of the Pledge of Allegiance "with liberty and justice for all", not just straight white males.

2. A quality public education system - you want "choice" in education, then go to a private school. This patchwork of public schools, charter schools and home schooling is not working. In fact, American education was ranked higher when there was no such "choice". Charter school vouchers simply skim the best students and funding from public schools and don't deliver a better education, they just take the best students.

3. Equal opportunity - for everyone. Same as equality, in jobs, schools, and other opportunities. Conservatives hate affirmative action for non-whites, but what are "legacy" admissions but affirmative action for rich whites who make up the bulk of the graduates of Ivy League schools. These kids are NOT getting in on their merits either.

When it comes to hiring, it would be interesting to see a truly "blind test". Recruiters would be given resumees which contain no personal information about the applicant - name, sex, address, only their skills and work history. Interviews would be similary blind - done via electronic communications - questions and answers. The HR people pick their hires, and see who wins.

Now I know that there is more to the hiring process than skills and work history, there's also whether or not the person will be a good "fit" with the existing staff. I believe such a test will reveal how deep these biases and prejudices are. That really well qualified women and/or minorities are routinely being passed over in favour of less qualifed white males and will be really eye-opening for the public at large.

4. Reduced military spending. Every conservative should be forced to read a detailed history of the rise and fall of Rome. There are dangerous parallels going on here. Both the corrupting influence of lobbying, and the corruptability of a government dependant on senators raising massive amounts of funds.

The costs of Rome's standing armies was a huge fianancial drain on the economy of the city. Initially only Romans, were allowed to serve but as Rome conquered most of the known world at the time, there weren't enough Romans to fill the need. So non-citizens were recruited. Each soldier was promised an acre of land in Rome on retirement. Non-citizens were promised citizenship. But eventually there was no land left in Rome to give them, so soldiers were encouraged to retire where they were last stationed, because it would be easier to give them that one acre in the conquered lands.

Armies were lead by consuls who paid their own troops. Conquering new lands was one way of doing it. The captured wealth could then be used to pay the troops (after the requisite tribute was sent to Rome).

Last but not least, Senators were expected to provide "games" for the people of Rome - gladiators, lions, chariot races, and other entertainments. This would ensure their re-election, but such games were expensive, so they had "sponsors". Knights (people of the business class), who sought passage of favourable legislation, who would bankroll the Senators to get their laws passed.

When the democracy of the elections was abolished and the leaders of the city became "Emperors", the city's decline was inevitable. Previously, the elites considered it a sacred duty to serve as the "First Man of Rome", but eventually it became a naked power grab, which those in power used to line their own pockets.

If any of this sounds familiar, you would be correct.

Beautifully and incisively said. And ironic in the way that your point four on massive military spending, by far the largest cause of his point two, "massive debt", was completely ignored by the OP as the elephant in the room cause that it is, that military spending easily dwarfing any other country in the world.

Also can't help noticing the ironical contrast between your "Quality public education system" point, and his "as the Republic [sic] folds, so do it is [sic] documents". One might note that said documents must also fold as the command of English does....

 

[Votto]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

More idiot conservatives pretending to understand what liberals want:

1. Equal rights for all - men, women, white, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims Christians, gays, straights, not just white Christian males - all legal citizens. You know that part of the Pledge of Allegiance "with liberty and justice for all", not just straight white males.

2. A quality public education system - you want "choice" in education, then go to a private school. This patchwork of public schools, charter schools and home schooling is not working. In fact, American education was ranked higher when there was no such "choice". Charter school vouchers simply skim the best students and funding from public schools and don't deliver a better education, they just take the best students.

3. Equal opportunity - for everyone. Same as equality, in jobs, schools, and other opportunities. Conservatives hate affirmative action for non-whites, but what are "legacy" admissions but affirmative action for rich whites who make up the bulk of the graduates of Ivy League schools. These kids are NOT getting in on their merits either.

When it comes to hiring, it would be interesting to see a truly "blind test". Recruiters would be given resumees which contain no personal information about the applicant - name, sex, address, only their skills and work history. Interviews would be similary blind - done via electronic communications - questions and answers. The HR people pick their hires, and see who wins.

Now I know that there is more to the hiring process than skills and work history, there's also whether or not the person will be a good "fit" with the existing staff. I believe such a test will reveal how deep these biases and prejudices are. That really well qualified women and/or minorities are routinely being passed over in favour of less qualifed white males and will be really eye-opening for the public at large.

4. Reduced military spending. Every conservative should be forced to read a detailed history of the rise and fall of Rome. There are dangerous parallels going on here. Both the corrupting influence of lobbying, and the corruptability of a government dependant on senators raising massive amounts of funds.

The costs of Rome's standing armies was a huge fianancial drain on the economy of the city. Initially only Romans, were allowed to serve but as Rome conquered most of the known world at the time, there weren't enough Romans to fill the need. So non-citizens were recruited. Each soldier was promised an acre of land in Rome on retirement. Non-citizens were promised citizenship. But eventually there was no land left in Rome to give them, so soldiers were encouraged to retire where they were last stationed, because it would be easier to give them that one acre in the conquered lands.

Armies were lead by consuls who paid their own troops. Conquering new lands was one way of doing it. The captured wealth could then be used to pay the troops (after the requisite tribute was sent to Rome).

Last but not least, Senators were expected to provide "games" for the people of Rome - gladiators, lions, chariot races, and other entertainments. This would ensure their re-election, but such games were expensive, so they had "sponsors". Knights (people of the business class), who sought passage of favourable legislation, who would bankroll the Senators to get their laws passed.

When the democracy of the elections was abolished and the leaders of the city became "Emperors", the city's decline was inevitable. Previously, the elites considered it a sacred duty to serve as the "First Man of Rome", but eventually it became a naked power grab, which those in power used to line their own pockets.

If any of this sounds familiar, you would be correct.

1. You say you want equality? Well tell that to polygamists who are not able to marry. Why are the unable to marry? Because the secular state thinks that polygamy is icky. No, the reason polygamists are unable to marry is that they are conservative and they don't have the lobby group that gays had. For you see, gays on average don't have the financial burden to raise children, so as a result, most are upwardly mobile and can throw their money at legislators to get their way. Gays could care less about conservative religious polygamists, who are the worst of the worst.

2. You say just go to a private school if you want a decent education? Well let's attempt to use our brain for a little bit, shall we? Which public schools are the worst public schools? Are they not the poor inner city public schools? I know because I've visited them. They are akin to an inner city prison for children. It is there that they are introduced to gangs and drugs and most of the girls wind up pregnant. All the doors are chain linked, except the entrance, where there is a guard and a metal detector to stop student from carrying in guns and knives. Unfortunately for poor folk, they are unable financially to move to a rich school district nor can they afford a private school. Moreover, most of the poor parents are not even educated enough to know what exactly they are doing to their children by sending them to inner city public school prisons. I do know one couple that lived in a poor inner city district, so they moved from their house and rented a small cramped apartment in a better school district. They were miserable where they lived but at least their children had a shot at getting a decent education instead of being educated in living a life of crime. Of course, most of these children in the inner city are minorities. I reckon this is the underhanded liberal way to ensure continued segregation of minorities so that their white kids won't have to mingle with them in the nicer school districts.

3. How about instead of focusing on requiring colleges to accept minority students through affirmative action who have not been prepared to compete academically with white kids who have had a silver spoon in their mouths their whole lives, perhaps we could give them a decent public education and let the chips fall where they may. I recently heard of a poor Asian kid who had a perfect score on the SAT and a 4.0 average, but could not get into Yale because they had a quota for accepting blacks. this is the insanity that is caused by liberal programs.

4. The US has an ample military to defend itself and to destroy the entire globe about 4 times over. However, it is Progressives in both parties who insist on "leading" the world. In other words, they insist on being the military policeman. If Hillary had been elected, she would have instituted a no fly zone in Syria, which as we learned with Obama in Libya, is code for war and overthrowing a dictator so ISIS can move in and take over. Do you want to know the problem with liberals such as yourself? You support big government at home but not abroad, and the problem with Republicans is that they support big government abroad but not at home. Well guess what dingleberries, once you create big government, once you create that Frankenstein, then it does as it pleases and will continue to be involved in both. Wilson and FDR created a war conquering military machine that has gone nonstop since its creation. Now they don't even bother declaring war. Of course, you have no problem with WW1, WW2, Korean war, and Vietnam war, and the Libyan war being started by Dims, eh?

Woops! Looks like you stepped in a pile of poo. Sorry bout that.

 

[ptbw forever]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

You forgot the biggest pillar of all:

The hatred of the west/white people

 

[Pogo]

From near as I can tell, there are 4 pillars of Progressivism which is their foundation. All four of these pillars is an assault on the Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution is a document that attempted to create a government that is limited. In other words, those in government are viewed as not having any superior intellectual capacity or righteous character than the average citizen. Such outrageous thinking must be destroyed so that every aspect in our lives is overseen and regulated by government who are the master race. Why without Big Brother monitoring our every move, we would all be dying in the streets as we render the planet inhabitable environmentally.

1. Illegal Immigration. Illegal immigration is the first pillar. It carries with it the notion that borders are not needed. We hear many Progs today say as much. So if there are no borders, then there are no sovereign nations. If there are no sovereign nations, then the Republic becomes obsolete, along with its documents such as the Constitution. Then an all powerful world government can be set up with a more "enlightened" Constitution that will be offered.

2. Massive debt. Massive debt will eventually destroy the Republic. It is not a matter of if, but when. No nation can continue trillion dollar deficits indefinitely. How they got this far is nothing short of a miracle. And as the Republic folds, again, so do it's documents.

3. Assault on Christianity. Many think that morality and government are separate, but in reality, all laws represent a moral code. Moreover, only a moral society can be trusted with freedom. As Ben Franklin once said, "In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think that a General government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as toned despotic government, being incapable of any other." If society loses its moral soul and becomes a nation of convicts, then a warden is required to maintain order. Ripping morality out of schools and the rest of society is key to their cause. It's like I've always said, prison is a Prog utopia. Everyone has equal housing, dress, food, education, and health care and all of it is free. Not only that, these are "gun free zones" and every day is a gay pride day.

4. Centralized all powerful government. The last pillar upon which Progressivism rests is an all powerful centralized government. The only time this is not embraced is when it infringes upon one of the other pillars. For you see Progs today run around chanting state rights when it comes to illegal drug legalization or moving illegals around from sanctuary city to sanctuary city. For example, refeer use is a federal crime, as is illegal immigration. Progs are simply openly defying these rules of law as states like Colorado legalize the use of reefer or cities openly declare themselves a refuge for illegals. However, when it comes to any other issue, state rights go bye, bye. Instead, with Obama in office writing EO's that violate federal law on such things as immigration, then all of a sudden the federal government becomes the ultimate authority again. Then when states like Arizona try and stand up to enforce immigration laws on the books, they get sued by Obama and company and forced to comply with the law,. We have now become a nation of men, not laws, which further degrades the Constitution as a meaningless document to be reinterpreted awayor simply ignored by Progs to the point where no one even refers to it anymore.

More idiot conservatives pretending to understand what liberals want:

1. Equal rights for all - men, women, white, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims Christians, gays, straights, not just white Christian males - all legal citizens. You know that part of the Pledge of Allegiance "with liberty and justice for all", not just straight white males.

2. A quality public education system - you want "choice" in education, then go to a private school. This patchwork of public schools, charter schools and home schooling is not working. In fact, American education was ranked higher when there was no such "choice". Charter school vouchers simply skim the best students and funding from public schools and don't deliver a better education, they just take the best students.

3. Equal opportunity - for everyone. Same as equality, in jobs, schools, and other opportunities. Conservatives hate affirmative action for non-whites, but what are "legacy" admissions but affirmative action for rich whites who make up the bulk of the graduates of Ivy League schools. These kids are NOT getting in on their merits either.

When it comes to hiring, it would be interesting to see a truly "blind test". Recruiters would be given resumees which contain no personal information about the applicant - name, sex, address, only their skills and work history. Interviews would be similary blind - done via electronic communications - questions and answers. The HR people pick their hires, and see who wins.

Now I know that there is more to the hiring process than skills and work history, there's also whether or not the person will be a good "fit" with the existing staff. I believe such a test will reveal how deep these biases and prejudices are. That really well qualified women and/or minorities are routinely being passed over in favour of less qualifed white males and will be really eye-opening for the public at large.

4. Reduced military spending. Every conservative should be forced to read a detailed history of the rise and fall of Rome. There are dangerous parallels going on here. Both the corrupting influence of lobbying, and the corruptability of a government dependant on senators raising massive amounts of funds.

The costs of Rome's standing armies was a huge fianancial drain on the economy of the city. Initially only Romans, were allowed to serve but as Rome conquered most of the known world at the time, there weren't enough Romans to fill the need. So non-citizens were recruited. Each soldier was promised an acre of land in Rome on retirement. Non-citizens were promised citizenship. But eventually there was no land left in Rome to give them, so soldiers were encouraged to retire where they were last stationed, because it would be easier to give them that one acre in the conquered lands.

Armies were lead by consuls who paid their own troops. Conquering new lands was one way of doing it. The captured wealth could then be used to pay the troops (after the requisite tribute was sent to Rome).

Last but not least, Senators were expected to provide "games" for the people of Rome - gladiators, lions, chariot races, and other entertainments. This would ensure their re-election, but such games were expensive, so they had "sponsors". Knights (people of the business class), who sought passage of favourable legislation, who would bankroll the Senators to get their laws passed.

When the democracy of the elections was abolished and the leaders of the city became "Emperors", the city's decline was inevitable. Previously, the elites considered it a sacred duty to serve as the "First Man of Rome", but eventually it became a naked power grab, which those in power used to line their own pockets.

If any of this sounds familiar, you would be correct.

1. You say you want equality? Well tell that to polygamists who are not able to marry. Why are the unable to marry? Because the secular state thinks that polygamy is icky. No, the reason polygamists are unable to marry is that they are conservative and they don't have the lobby group that gays had. For you see, gays on average don't have the financial burden to raise children, so as a result, most are upwardly mobile and can throw their money at legislators to get their way. Gays could care less about conservative religious polygamists, who are the worst of the worst.

2. You say just go to a private school if you want a decent education? Well let's attempt to use our brain for a little bit, shall we? Which public schools are the worst public schools? Are they not the poor inner city public schools? I know because I've visited them. They are akin to an inner city prison for children. It is there that they are introduced to gangs and drugs and most of the girls wind up pregnant. All the doors are chain linked, except the entrance, where there is a guard and a metal detector to stop student from carrying in guns and knives. Unfortunately for poor folk, they are unable financially to move to a rich school district nor can they afford a private school. Moreover, most of the poor parents are not even educated enough to know what exactly they are doing to their children by sending them to inner city public school prisons. I do know one couple that lived in a poor inner city district, so they moved from their house and rented a small cramped apartment in a better school district. They were miserable where they lived but at least their children had a shot at getting a decent education instead of being educated in living a life of crime. Of course, most of these children in the inner city are minorities. I reckon this is the underhanded liberal way to ensure continued segregation of minorities so that their white kids won't have to mingle with them in the nicer school districts.

3. How about instead of focusing on requiring colleges to accept minority students through affirmative action who have not been prepared to compete academically with white kids who have had a silver spoon in their mouths their whole lives, perhaps we could give them a decent public education and let the chips fall where they may. I recently heard of a poor Asian kid who had a perfect score on the SAT and a 4.0 average, but could not get into Yale because they had a quota for accepting blacks. this is the insanity that is caused by liberal programs.

4. The US has an ample military to defend itself and to destroy the entire globe about 4 times over. However, it is Progressives in both parties who insist on "leading" the world. In other words, they insist on being the military policeman. If Hillary had been elected, she would have instituted a no fly zone in Syria, which as we learned with Obama in Libya, is code for war and overthrowing a dictator so ISIS can move in and take over. Do you want to know the problem with liberals such as yourself? You support big government at home but not abroad, and the problem with Republicans is that they support big government abroad but not at home. Well guess what dingleberries, once you create big government, once you create that Frankenstein, then it does as it pleases and will continue to be involved in both. Wilson and FDR created a war conquering military machine that has gone nonstop since its creation. Now they don't even bother declaring war. Of course, you have no problem with WW1, WW2, Korean war, and Vietnam war, and the Libyan war being started by Dims, eh?

Woops! Looks like you stepped in a pile of poo. Sorry bout that.

Woops! Looks like you started a thread about a term that doesn't even exist. That must suck.

WTF is the thing with label-obsession anyway? What are you, a record collector?

 

[ptbw forever]

Republicans called JFK a communist and now you claim to love him

JFK was well known as anti-communist...he put MLK under FBI investigation for ties to communism...and you claim he's your hero. He also pushed defense spending to a higher percentage of federal expenditures than current military spending...and you claim to love him.

Kennedy would look today's progressive movement in the face and say - I do not know you.

Here is what Conservatives thought of JFK

If those Conservatives could have the choice between JFK and Bill or Obama, which do you think they would choose?