# Hello! I am The Progressive Patriot!



## TheProgressivePatriot

Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.

I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism

At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.

However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


----------



## LA RAM FAN

indeed we have a government that is the supression of its people and free speech form the forces both within and outside.well said. our forefathers would be horrified how the sheep are not doing anything about this facist dictatership we live in now.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Well, you can't be both.

You are either a Communist OR a Patriot.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

9/11 inside job said:


> indeed we have a government that is the supression of its people and free speech form the forces both within and outside.well said. our forefathers would be horrified how the sheep are not doing anything about this facist dictatership we live in now.



I would not go so far as to call in a fascist dictatorship.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Uncensored2008 said:


> Well, you can't be both.
> 
> You are either a Communist OR a Patriot.


Care to explain that??


----------



## Pop23

Progressive is to Patriot 

As

Bruce is to Caitlyn. 

Welcome anyway.


----------



## Uncensored2008

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Care to explain that??



A patriot is one who supports and defends the Constitution of the United States.

A "progressive" AK Communist, seeks to eradicate the Constitution, starting with the bill of rights, and establish a totalitarian kleptocracy to make a "fair" system where all peasants have equal poverty.

You can be one or the other - no both. As has been pointed out by others to you, it is an oxymoron.


----------



## LA RAM FAN

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> 
> indeed we have a government that is the supression of its people and free speech form the forces both within and outside.well said. our forefathers would be horrified how the sheep are not doing anything about this facist dictatership we live in now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not go so far as to call in a fascist dictatorship.
Click to expand...

when the CIA,FBI and our corrupt government institutuions murder their citizens cause they told the truth and gave a version that exposed their lies,dont see how that is any different than russia under stalin.

america has become the country russia was under stalin and russia has become much more like the country our forefathers meant for this country to be.sad but true.the roles have been reversed.

russia has gotten smart abandoning the fed which is why our government is trying to make them look like the bady guys when were the ones murdering innocent civilians of other countries.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Pop23 said:


> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.


Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

9/11 inside job said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> 
> indeed we have a government that is the supression of its people and free speech form the forces both within and outside.well said. our forefathers would be horrified how the sheep are not doing anything about this facist dictatership we live in now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not go so far as to call in a fascist dictatorship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when the CIA,FBI and our corrupt government institutuions murder their citizens cause they told the truth and gave a version that exposed their lies,dont see how that is any different than russia under stalin.
> 
> america has become the country russia was under stalin and russia has become much more like the country our forefathers meant for this country to be.sad but true.the roles have been reversed.
> 
> russia has gotten smart abandoning the fed which is why our government is trying to make them look like the bady guys when were the ones murdering innocent civilians of other countries.
Click to expand...

That is a pretty grim view of things. Think that you would be happier in Russia?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Whats with the sudden surge of liberals claiming to be conservative around here?


----------



## Pop23

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?
Click to expand...


No, Bruce thinks he's a she,but sadly, he's a dood. 

See how that works?


----------



## HenryBHough

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot..........



Congratulations!

First time anyone has adopted an oxymoron as a screen name!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Uncensored2008 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain that??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> A patriot is one who supports and defends the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That would be me, dude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> A "progressive" AK Communist, seeks to eradicate the Constitution, starting with the bill of rights, and establish a totalitarian kleptocracy to make a "fair" system where all peasants have equal poverty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "progressive" AKA Communist? Seriously ? Do you own a dictionary? I want to make everyone equal in terms of wealth and property? You seem to know more about me than I know about myself
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be one or the other - not both. As has been pointed out by others to you, it is an oxymoron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have some rather extreme views.  By your standards, there have been a whole lot of Communist presidents starting with Teddy Roosevelt
Click to expand...


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Whats with the sudden surge of liberals claiming to be conservative around here?


This is just what I'm talking about here. I'm not claiming to be conservative, but you knew that already


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Pop23 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, Bruce thinks he's a she,but sadly, he's a dood.
> 
> See how that works?
Click to expand...

Sounds like you need to find a thread about transgender issues


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

HenryBHough said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot..........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congratulations!
> 
> First time anyone has adopted an oxymoron as a screen name!
Click to expand...

Try reading beyond the name


----------



## Pogo

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



Welcome to the fray --- but political rants belong in the political forums, not here.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Pogo said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the fray --- but political rants belong in the political forums, not here.
Click to expand...


It does say "tell us about yourself"


----------



## Pop23

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, Bruce thinks he's a she,but sadly, he's a dood.
> 
> See how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds like you need to find a thread about transgender issues
Click to expand...


Sounds like you've figured out the same scam Bruce did. Call yourself whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Problem is, some ain't buying what you're selling. 

But welcome anyway.


----------



## Pogo

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the fray --- but political rants belong in the political forums, not here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It does say "tell us about yourself"
Click to expand...


Yes, and you did, but then you went all soapbox tangent derby.  This is just a forum to say howdy-do.  Bringing political rants in just bogs it down, and clutters your welcome wagon.


----------



## LA RAM FAN

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> 
> indeed we have a government that is the supression of its people and free speech form the forces both within and outside.well said. our forefathers would be horrified how the sheep are not doing anything about this facist dictatership we live in now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not go so far as to call in a fascist dictatorship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when the CIA,FBI and our corrupt government institutuions murder their citizens cause they told the truth and gave a version that exposed their lies,dont see how that is any different than russia under stalin.
> 
> america has become the country russia was under stalin and russia has become much more like the country our forefathers meant for this country to be.sad but true.the roles have been reversed.
> 
> russia has gotten smart abandoning the fed which is why our government is trying to make them look like the bady guys when were the ones murdering innocent civilians of other countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a pretty grim view of things. Think that you would be happier in Russia?
Click to expand...

Only not living in denial and not  afraid of the truth to look at the facts like so many sheep in america are is all. Just not burying my head in the sand with the ostrich like so many other sheep here do is all.lol


----------



## aaronleland

Pop23 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, Bruce thinks he's a she,but sadly, he's a dood.
> 
> See how that works?
Click to expand...


Sadly? That Vanity Fair cover give you a chubby, Pops? 

And welcome, Pee Pee. Is it okay if I call you Pee Pee?


----------



## April

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


----------



## Pop23

aaronleland said:


> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pop23 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive is to Patriot
> 
> As
> 
> Bruce is to Caitlyn.
> 
> Welcome anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce IS Caitlyn so Progressive is Patriot......see how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, Bruce thinks he's a she,but sadly, he's a dood.
> 
> See how that works?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sadly? That Vanity Fair cover give you a chubby, Pops?
> 
> And welcome, Pee Pee. Is it okay if I call you Pee Pee?
Click to expand...


You seem to have an overt attraction to "pee pee's" and "chubbys" this morning Aaronleland

Something you'd like to share with the rest of the class this morning?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

AngelsNDemons said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
Click to expand...



*Thank you!!*


----------



## Ringel05

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


Well you're in the proper online nuthouse, you'll be in the blue wing.  Put on your favorite straight jacket and jump right in.......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Ringel05 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> Well you're in the proper online nuthouse, you'll be in the blue wing.  Put on your favorite straight jacket and jump right in.......
Click to expand...


Thanks! I'm all in.


----------



## Mertex

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



Sorry I missed welcoming you sooner.........better late than never, I say.






Good to see another progressive - don't get discouraged with the negativity here......there's lots of good people and you'll have fun.


----------



## Vigilante

Progressive Patriot....at least he knows what an oxymoron is!....or should by now!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Mertex said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I missed welcoming you sooner.........better late than never, I say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good to see another progressive - don't get discouraged with the negativity here......there's lots of good people and you'll have fun.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm already having fun! There sure are some lunatics here but I can deal with them.


----------



## Mertex

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Mertex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I missed welcoming you sooner.........better late than never, I say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good to see another progressive - don't get discouraged with the negativity here......there's lots of good people and you'll have fun.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you. I'm already having fun! There sure are some lunatics here but I can deal with them.
Click to expand...


I'm happy to hear that.......they can be exasperating........like talking to rocks.


----------



## Hawkeye2j

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


Couldn't agree more welcome


----------



## sealybobo

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


You aren't a patriot if you don't have a perverted spin on the constitution.

And you must be a commy if you complain when the rich take over the government that use to represent we the people.  Republicans have been pushing the idea that our government is the problem? They say our gov. Is the source of the problem. Its evil and corrupt. How's that different from what Isis believes?

But jeb Gw Christie Walker rubio trump are not bad. Everything's bad about our gov. Except the anti gov. GOP who are clearly for the rich.

Even though we all know trickle down doesn't work.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.

Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee


----------



## Hawkeye2j

CrusaderFrank said:


> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee


Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.


----------



## sealybobo

Uncensored2008 said:


> Well, you can't be both.
> 
> You are either a Communist OR a Patriot.


Why do American patriots have to always love capitalism? Isn't it just another ism? Do we worship it more than God? What if capitalism gets corrupted like the other isms did? 

Keep in mind capitalism isn't clearly defined. For example Obama is a capitalist, right? But not a Ron Paul free market zero regulations kind. 

Truth is some things should be either gov. Regulated or socialized. Medicine, schools, police, elections, prisons, public parks, fire, gas, electric, military. And even free trade needs to be regulated.


----------



## sealybobo

Hawkeye2j said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.
Click to expand...

Republicans have a great track record. Look at Bruce Jenner. He's a proud conservative.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Hawkeye2j said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.
Click to expand...


Detroit, Baltimore, Greece, Communist China, the USSR, etc.

Remarkable


----------



## CrusaderFrank

sealybobo said:


> Hawkeye2j said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Republicans have a great track record. Look at Bruce Jenner. He's a proud conservative.
Click to expand...

^ hater


----------



## boedicca

CrusaderFrank said:


> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee




Progressive Patriot = Oxymoron


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

CrusaderFrank said:


> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee


----------



## Uncensored2008

Hawkeye2j said:


> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.



The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela... 

Remarkable, but the remarks are far from positive...


----------



## sealybobo

CrusaderFrank said:


> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee


Did you take a sick day this year? Thank a liberal. Did you have to work 16 hours today no overtime? Thank a liberal. Are you middle class? Chances are, thank a liberal. If not you are the exception not the norm.

My brothers coming back from Europe after 4 years. He says America is no longer the greatest country. Why? Because the middle class went away. The GOP's put all the money with the rich. We told you this no regulations bs wouldn't work. Your way didn't work.

Now if we try to undo it through taxation you cry class warfare just like the rich called fdr a traitor to his class.


----------



## Hawkeye2j

One of the greatest two Patriots of all time also believed in some socialism.  Franklin invented the public library and Jefferson believed all education through University should be free.


----------



## boedicca

Uncensored2008 said:


> Hawkeye2j said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela...
> 
> Remarkable, but the remarks are far from positive...
Click to expand...


Venezuela!  The EPITOME of a Socialist Paradise and Progressivism on Parade!


Meanwhile In Venezuela... The Socialist Paradise Has Arrived Zero Hedge


----------



## sealybobo

Uncensored2008 said:


> Hawkeye2j said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Progressives have a remarkable success record.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela...
> 
> Remarkable, but the remarks are far from positive...
Click to expand...

The Soviets are progressive? Like the new deal? Social security? Medicare? Public schools? Are you really comparing us to Castro?

You know what? Soon you're not going to be able to use Cuba as the boogie man when were all going there on vacation


----------



## CrusaderFrank

sealybobo said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee
> 
> 
> 
> Did you take a sick day this year? Thank a liberal. Did you have to work 16 hours today no overtime? Thank a liberal. Are you middle class? Chances are, thank a liberal. If not you are the exception not the norm.
> 
> My brothers coming back from Europe after 4 years. He says America is no longer the greatest country. Why? Because the middle class went away. The GOP's put all the money with the rich. We told you this no regulations bs wouldn't work. Your way didn't work.
> 
> Now if we try to undo it through taxation you cry class warfare just like the rich called fdr a traitor to his class.
Click to expand...


"The middle class has been buried these past four years" -- Joe Biden, Oct 2012, Progressive


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Hawkeye2j said:


> One of the greatest two Patriots of all time also believed in some socialism.  Franklin invented the public library and Jefferson believed all education through University should be free.


Yes this country has a long history of socialism and socialistic ideals. These uneducated ass hats don't understand the difference between a social democracy and Marxism. That is especially true since Obama became president. They alternate between call him a Socialist/Marxist and a Fascist dictator and don't even understand what those words mean.


----------



## Hawkeye2j

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Hawkeye2j said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the greatest two Patriots of all time also believed in some socialism.  Franklin invented the public library and Jefferson believed all education through University should be free.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes this country has a long history of socialism and socialistic ideals. These uneducated ass hats don't understand the difference between a social democracy and Marxism. That is especially true since Obama became president. They alternate between call him a Socialist/Marxist and a Fascist dictator and don't even understand what those words mean.
Click to expand...

Exactly


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Hawkeye2j said:


> One of the greatest two Patriots of all time also believed in some socialism.  Franklin invented the public library and Jefferson believed all education through University should be free.



"...the education at college of fools" pretty sure Jefferson was speaking about those who were academically qualified and not the Low Information Dem base


----------



## Hawkeye2j

CrusaderFrank said:


> Hawkeye2j said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the greatest two Patriots of all time also believed in some socialism.  Franklin invented the public library and Jefferson believed all education through University should be free.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...the education at college of fools" pretty sure Jefferson was speaking about those who were academically qualified and not the Low Information Dem base
Click to expand...

You have it backwards.  It is the GOP that is low information.  Every study taken has shown that.  Democrats are far more knowledgeable.  Must be an interesting fantasy world you live in.


----------



## Uncensored2008

sealybobo said:


> Did you take a sick day this year? Thank a liberal. Did you have to work 16 hours today no overtime? Thank a liberal. Are you middle class? Chances are, thank a liberal. If not you are the exception not the norm.
> 
> My brothers coming back from Europe after 4 years. He says America is no longer the greatest country. Why? Because the middle class went away. The GOP's put all the money with the rich. We told you this no regulations bs wouldn't work. Your way didn't work.
> 
> Now if we try to undo it through taxation you cry class warfare just like the rich called fdr a traitor to his class.



Did the secret police kick your door in in the middle of the night? Thank a leftist. Did you get disappeared to a work camp? Thank a leftist. Were you worked until you dropped from exhaustion? Thank a leftist. Were you starved as an enemy of the state? Thank a leftist. Will you die in chains? Thank a leftist.

What would you leftist do with a liberal? All of the above.

Silly Bonobo, you are no liberal - you have nothing in common with Jefferson or Paine. Lenin, Mao and Chavez are who you share your views with. Views assigned to you by your master, George Soros.


----------



## sealybobo

CrusaderFrank said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives patriot is like Peaceful Jihadists.
> 
> Progressives have a 100% Fail Guarantee
> 
> 
> 
> Did you take a sick day this year? Thank a liberal. Did you have to work 16 hours today no overtime? Thank a liberal. Are you middle class? Chances are, thank a liberal. If not you are the exception not the norm.
> 
> My brothers coming back from Europe after 4 years. He says America is no longer the greatest country. Why? Because the middle class went away. The GOP's put all the money with the rich. We told you this no regulations bs wouldn't work. Your way didn't work.
> 
> Now if we try to undo it through taxation you cry class warfare just like the rich called fdr a traitor to his class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "The middle class has been buried these past four years" -- Joe Biden, Oct 2012, Progressive
Click to expand...

We are still suffering from all the good paying middle class jobs that went overseas.

And the companies that came back now don't have to worry about unions so they pay only $10 hr. Congratulations, the job creator can now hire 30 people instead of 10. Republican dream.


----------



## sealybobo

Uncensored2008 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you take a sick day this year? Thank a liberal. Did you have to work 16 hours today no overtime? Thank a liberal. Are you middle class? Chances are, thank a liberal. If not you are the exception not the norm.
> 
> My brothers coming back from Europe after 4 years. He says America is no longer the greatest country. Why? Because the middle class went away. The GOP's put all the money with the rich. We told you this no regulations bs wouldn't work. Your way didn't work.
> 
> Now if we try to undo it through taxation you cry class warfare just like the rich called fdr a traitor to his class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did the secret police kick your door in in the middle of the night? Thank a leftist. Did you get disappeared to a work camp? Thank a leftist. Were you worked until you dropped from exhaustion? Thank a leftist. Were you starved as an enemy of the state? Thank a leftist. Will you die in chains? Thank a leftist.
> 
> What would you leftist do with a liberal? All of the above.
> 
> Silly Bonobo, you are no liberal - you have nothing in common with Jefferson or Paine. Lenin, Mao and Chavez are who you share your views with. Views assigned to you by your master, George Soros.
Click to expand...

You know me better than I know myself.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Hawkeye2j said:


> You have it backwards.  It is the GOP that is low information.  Every study taken has shown that.  Democrats are far more knowledgeable.  Must be an interesting fantasy world you live in.



Every study conducted by radical leftists confirm that radical leftists are smarter and sexier...

Oddly enough, studies by the Ku Klux Klan indicate that black people are inferior.

democrats are baffled by these results....


----------



## HenryBHough

Remember when sock puppets were amusing?


----------



## Idadunno

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


----------



## mudwhistle

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



Your name is an oxymoron.


----------



## Idadunno

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


Progressivism means to regulate, is not about progress except in how teachers teach (different thing). Political progressivism is about protecting the people's rights because of progress. It is an obsolete condition (it is not an ideology) because we have our laws in place--now we interpret and expand them to cover new bases. You and Rambo will get along famously! 
Teddy Roosevelt and Progressivism Slavery By Another Name Bento PBS
The Original Tea Partiers How GOP Insurgents Invented Progressivism - The Atlantic
The Progressive Movement
The Progressive Era 1890 - 1920 
Progressivism and Liberalism


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

mudwhistle said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your name is an oxymoron.
Click to expand...

Real original! Wow!! Clever! Actually I get that a lot from reactionary conservatives who have no vision for a better future and a truly great nation. From those who want to take the country back to the 19th century rather than lead her into the 21st century. Why do some people who call themselves patriots hate America so much? I don't suppose that you  have anything to say that is actually useful about my post?


----------



## PredFan

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



I think I'll just call you "Oxymoron".


----------



## mudwhistle

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your name is an oxymoron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Real original! Wow!! Clever! Actually I get that a lot from reactionary conservatives who have no vision for a better future and a truly great nation. From those who want to take the country back to the 19th century rather than lead her into the 21st century. Why do some people who call themselves patriots hate America so much? I don't suppose that you  have anything to say that is actually useful about my post?
Click to expand...

Must be some truth to it then.

BTW......Progressive doesn't mean progressive thinking. Progressives tend to want to stop progress and take us back to 1920.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

mudwhistle said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your name is an oxymoron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Real original! Wow!! Clever! Actually I get that a lot from reactionary conservatives who have no vision for a better future and a truly great nation. From those who want to take the country back to the 19th century rather than lead her into the 21st century. Why do some people who call themselves patriots hate America so much? I don't suppose that you  have anything to say that is actually useful about my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Must be some truth to it then.
> 
> BTW......Progressive doesn't mean progressive thinking. Progressives tend to want to stop progress and take us back to 1920.
Click to expand...


Really? Please explain that.


----------



## Iceweasel

Progressives are NOT patriots. They want to turn us into something we've never been before and apart from what made us great. That's not the definition of a patriot.

Introduction fail.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Iceweasel said:


> Progressives are NOT patriots. They want to turn us into something we've never been before and apart from what made us great. That's not the definition of a patriot.
> 
> Introduction fail.


And what would that be?


----------



## norwegen

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


A country based on democracy?  Where were you educated?  Western society, including the Whigs in America, reordered the ancien regime when they slowly, at first in fits and starts, corroded monarchy by supplanting it with republicanism.

In the republics of Europe - the Swiss cantons, the Italian city-states, the Dutch provinces - the people promoted republicanism but were reticent to depose their kings.  In America, however, a republic without a king (for all intents and purposes), republicanism promised new conceptions of society and the individual.  New ways for the individual to relate to the family, the state, other individuals.

Democracy was not a new idea.  It did not revolutionize the world in the eighteenth century.  American republicanism did.  American republicanism was unique; it was the form of government that Abraham Lincoln feared would perish from the earth if America were to perish.

If progressives have a vision for a truly great country, then the American Whigs of the eighteenth century were progressive.  The republicanism they promoted is anathema to today's progressives.  Progressives are not patriots.  Patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries.


----------



## boedicca

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Progressives are NOT patriots. They want to turn us into something we've never been before and apart from what made us great. That's not the definition of a patriot.
> 
> Introduction fail.
> 
> 
> 
> And what would that be?
Click to expand...


A totalitarian state.


----------



## eagle1462010




----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

norwegen said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> A country based on democracy?  Where were you educated?  Western society, including the Whigs in America, reordered the ancien regime when they slowly, at first in fits and starts, corroded monarchy by supplanting it with republicanism.
> 
> In the republics of Europe - the Swiss cantons, the Italian city-states, the Dutch provinces - the people promoted republicanism but were reticent to depose their kings.  In America, however, a republic without a king (for all intents and purposes), republicanism promised new conceptions of society and the individual.  New ways for the individual to relate to the family, the state, other individuals.
> 
> Democracy was not a new idea.  It did not revolutionize the world in the eighteenth century.  American republicanism did.  American republicanism was unique; it was the form of government that Abraham Lincoln feared would perish from the earth if America were to perish.
> 
> If progressives have a vision for a truly great country, then the American Whigs of the eighteenth century were progressive.  The republicanism they promoted is anathema to today's progressives.  Progressives are not patriots.  Patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries.
Click to expand...



Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy? I understand the concept of Republicanism quite well. Of course I know that this is not an actual democracy. However, Our Constitutional Republic incorporates elements of a democracy in that we elect our representatives by popular vote (sort of, we do have the Electoral College and gerrymandering)

Nothing that you have resented refutes my contention that as a progressive, I am also a patriot who want’s this country to be the best place that it can be for all of her people and to be held in the highest esteem possible among nations of the world through leading by example.

Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd


----------



## norwegen

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?


Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.


TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd


Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

norwegen said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
Click to expand...

Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.


----------



## saveliberty

We are progressing nicely down a path to destruction.  Redistribution is not a road to improvement.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

saveliberty said:


> We are progressing nicely down a path to destruction.  Redistribution is not a road to improvement.


Really? What is then ? Oligarchy? Wealth and income disparity? Redistribution has been a reality since the progressive movement of the early 1900's Why all the hysteria over it now?


----------



## Iceweasel

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> norwegen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
Click to expand...

You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.


----------



## Skull Pilot

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.


Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious 

Oscar Wilde


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Iceweasel said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> norwegen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
Click to expand...

Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?


----------



## Iceweasel

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> norwegen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
Click to expand...

I quoted your post, Bozo. 

"I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."

Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours. 

This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Iceweasel said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> norwegen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  You’re going to trash my entire post based on the fact that you don’t like or approve of the way I used the word democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your assertion that we do not want to transform the country is patently absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
Click to expand...


What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.


----------



## Carla_Danger

Welcome, ProgressivePatriot!


----------



## Ringel05

Getting a good laugh out of this thread.  A big thank you to all the participants........!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Carla_Danger said:


> Welcome, ProgressivePatriot!


Thank you!


----------



## Iceweasel

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> norwegen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  I also said you were not a patriot.
> Reread that, please.  I said you _do_ want to transform this country.
> 
> 
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
Click to expand...

I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.


----------



## Carla_Danger

Iceweasel said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> 
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
Click to expand...




I've read your postings, neither are you.


----------



## Iceweasel

Carla_Danger said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> 
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've read your postings, neither are you.
Click to expand...

Since I haven't that means you are full of shit. As usual.


----------



## Carla_Danger

Iceweasel said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> 
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've read your postings, neither are you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since I haven't that means you are full of shit. As usual.
Click to expand...




Good, because you're in no position to dictate what patriotism means.


----------



## Iceweasel

Carla_Danger said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've read your postings, neither are you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since I haven't that means you are full of shit. As usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good, because you're in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
Click to expand...

Are you menstruating or something?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Iceweasel said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ooops.  My bad. OK, you say  patriots do not endeavor to transform their countries. I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming. Stagnation is not patriotism by  any means.
> 
> 
> 
> You're an idiot. You think you are in a position to dictate what needs changing and define patriotism based on it. That's a special kind of stupid and we had enough retards before you showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look here Weasel, You are misrepresenting me with your equine excrement. Where did I say that I want to unilaterally dictate what needs changing? There are many things that  we, as a nation can agree on. Anyone who thinks that the country is perfect, that there is no room for improvement is a special kind of idiot who has his head where the sun don't shine. Would that be you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I quoted your post, Bozo.
> 
> "I explained why I believe that is exactly what patriots do when their country needs transforming."
> 
> Who decides what needs changing, what if someone disagrees with you? You decide and label that person a patriot. Like I said, a special kind of stupid, the excrement is all yours.
> 
> This is a republic, if you can't figure out how things are supposed to change or stay the same that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
Click to expand...


You may have read it but it's apparent that you did not understand it. I am not saying that I alone should be able decide anything for anybody. There are two word that you and the rest of your right wing ilk need to learn. " Inclusiveness" and "equality"  There is considerable consensus among rational people that those are desirable goals. Striving for that is in fact patriotism and  YOU are in no position to say that it is not.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Iceweasel said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are you blathering about, dude? Do you even know? I am well aware of the fact that this is a constitutional republic  and how things work. Read my original post again and try to articulate exactly what part of it you don't get or don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> I did, try reading the posts. Most idiotic introduction ever. You don't decide shit for anybody else, you are in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've read your postings, neither are you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since I haven't that means you are full of shit. As usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good, because you're in no position to dictate what patriotism means.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you menstruating or something?
Click to expand...

It's very telling that you can't seem to deal with anyone who you are at odds with without immediately  resorting to snide and derogatory comments and name calling. It speaks to your level of intellectual and emotion functioning, or more accurately, your level of disfunction


----------



## Mertex

CrusaderFrank said:


> Progressives *patriot *is like Peaceful Jihadists.



May be why so many conservatives call themselves "Patriots" - although they are "regressive"?


----------



## emilynghiem

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



Hey! Aren't you just in time!
I was just berating a friend of mine on here
for saying I was aligning too much with the rightwing
for my Constitutional views. I ranted out a long msg
about why can't I be a liberal progressive prochoice Democrat
AND a Constitutionalist AND include left and right interests equally?

And here you are, another Progressive and hopefully Constitutionalist.

I hate being the only one as if only Conservative Christian Republicans
have a monopoly on Constitutional law and authority to check govt.

Thanks for joining in and may we see
a successful peaceful reformation of our
govt, economy and society by working together
on effective sustainable solutions that meet
the standards of ALL parties, not just our own.

Why can we all unite on Constitutional values
and use that as the umbrella to house all the other
beliefs and visions we have collectively.

Why can't we have unity and diversity both, without compromising either one?

Thank you again!
Enjoy your stay and I hope you will be
one of those leading the people through
the next stages of political reforms
through Constitutional education and outreach.

May the Spirit of the Laws find rebirth
and unite all of us in our diverse roles
and contributions to fulfill America's legacy.

Yours truly,
Emily

Emily Nghiem
National Freedmen's Town District
http://www.freedmentown.com
ethics-commission.net
Earned Amnesty

Fun media projects for Constitutional educational outreach:
music video for Sustainable Campus converting sweatshop labor to workstudy jobs
Civil Rap
What Does the Law Say 
Rules Don t Apply Equal Inclusion Music Video Contest 
http www.houstonprogressive.org
http www.houstonprogressive.org


----------



## emilynghiem

Uncensored2008 said:


> Well, you can't be both.
> 
> You are either a Communist OR a Patriot.



Excuse me, please, but the couple who
successfully sued the City of Tomball for violating 14th Amendment and civil rights laws regarding discrimination
ARE self-proclaimed Marxists.

They just don't go around IMPOSING their views on anyone else
but respect the equal choice of beliefs of others. that doesn't mean you can't
still be Communist, Socialist, Marxist, Anarchist or whatever. 

Their beliefs as Marxists did not stop them from using Constitutional laws and process
to correct an unconstitutional problem.

The city they sued had allowed the KKK to use a public facility for an event that unlawfully excluded
members of the public on the basis of race.  So this policy was successfully corrected going
through the process by lawsuit, arguing that public facilities could not be used to discriminate.

You can be an anarchist, communist, left or right activist, and
still respect Constitutional laws, principles and process.

If you are so selfish or so self-righteous to think that your beliefs are the
ONE RIGHT WAY for ALL people that they should be imposed by govt,
well, welcome to the human race. Why do you think Constitutional
limits were set up -- because people will try to hijack govt and start imposing
their own agenda. Big fat duh!

So, Yes, there are people who ABUSE this process,
and thus if you put PARTY interests or Political BELIEF 
BEFORE the Constitution, this violates Constitutional laws and ethics.
It is a violation of the very laws or authority being invoked.

It is contradictory for ANY person of ANY party to abuse govt
to impose POLITICAL BELIEFS in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

We see this all the time, on both left and right, but 
* people only complain when the OTHER side does it
* or people can't complain when they expect to benefit from the same practice of political bullying
* and some people give up trying to stop it like trying to end war when it seems hopeless
All the more reason we should stop this political bullying by forcing one set of beliefs
down the next person's throat. We all know we don't want that done to us, WHY do we insist on
cheering on when someone does it to someone else. Are we really unable to operate any other way?

The Constitutional protections, respect and Inclusion of ALL people and ALL groups of all beliefs
must come first, and then all other beliefs can be included equally under that Umbrella
with no need to impose on each other. We can use our "free speech and press"
"right to petition and due process" to resolve any conflict, grievance or objection that arises.
We do not need to resort to bulldozing each other over every fault for political points.
Why not correct the problems so that we all benefit from long term solutions.
Are we even thinking about what is sustainable, and how we expect to solve
all the problems and debts we face WITHOUT working together, with teams to cover 
all the ground that this entails to fix everything with our economy, govt and social systems.

You CAN be a Constitutionalist AND  any other label or group, religious or political,
that is equally protected under free exercise of religion and equal protection
from discrimination on the basis of CREED.

The key is not to violate the same rights and beliefs of OTHERS,
and that is where putting the Constitution first is so important.


----------



## emilynghiem

Uncensored2008 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain that??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A patriot is one who supports and defends the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> A "progressive" AK Communist, seeks to eradicate the Constitution, starting with the bill of rights, and establish a totalitarian kleptocracy to make a "fair" system where all peasants have equal poverty.
> 
> You can be one or the other - no both. As has been pointed out by others to you, it is an oxymoron.
Click to expand...


You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.

This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.

The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.

But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.

Uncensored2008 what I might say
is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.

To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.

We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.

see also ethics-commission.net


----------



## hjmick

I'm not sure how I missed this intro OP but...


----------



## Statistikhengst

This is a pretty lively introduction thread....


----------



## percysunshine

Statistikhengst said:


> This is a pretty lively introduction thread....



.
I think the newbie needs a clown face.

Can you help him with that Stat?

.


----------



## Statistikhengst

percysunshine said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a pretty lively introduction thread....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> I think the newbie needs a clown face.
> 
> Can you help him with that Stat?
> 
> .
Click to expand...


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

emilynghiem said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain that??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A patriot is one who supports and defends the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> A "progressive" AK Communist, seeks to eradicate the Constitution, starting with the bill of rights, and establish a totalitarian kleptocracy to make a "fair" system where all peasants have equal poverty.
> 
> You can be one or the other - no both. As has been pointed out by others to you, it is an oxymoron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
Click to expand...


I must say , you have added another, much needed intellectual level to this board! I'm just now getting around to reading and absorbing your excellent writing. Many people here, including myself can learn something from you. Unfortunately, certain people who need to learn the most, wont read it, will dismiss it as nonsense, or simply wont understand it. Thank you for being here.!


----------



## emilynghiem

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain that??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A patriot is one who supports and defends the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> A "progressive" AK Communist, seeks to eradicate the Constitution, starting with the bill of rights, and establish a totalitarian kleptocracy to make a "fair" system where all peasants have equal poverty.
> 
> You can be one or the other - no both. As has been pointed out by others to you, it is an oxymoron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I must say , you have added another, much needed intellectual level to this board! I'm just now getting around to reading and absorbing your excellent writing. Many people here, including myself can learn something from you. Unfortunately, certain people who need to learn the most, wont read it, will dismiss it as nonsense, or simply wont understand it. Thank you for being here.!
Click to expand...

Thank YOU
Now that there's a pair of us
don't tell
They banish us, you know!
Ha ha wisdom from Emily Dickinson

JK I am not denying you couldn't turn out to be a total fascist commie, the same way I've been pegged as a nazi bigot; it's just that so many ppl have worked so hard to destroy the country by imposing their beliefs as mandates, why give you all the credit for damage done by others?

Not fair. You should at least prove what harm you've inflicted before earning any such reputation!

Ppbbffftt Enjoy yourself here. Feel free to criticize and correct me if you think I'm going too far left or right and not staying centered where all paths agree. 

I can list for you the ppl here who can handle political diversity and the ones who can't, where you have to stay within their bounds or they go on the attack. Some ppl are not "bilingual" on here and can only speak rightwing or leftwing or they feel attacked and use namecalling and bullying to enforce their borders. If you can try not to take it personally, you can focus on ppl who arent so territorial and learn ALOT from ppl here. And in return I look forward to reading how you approach things and learn from you -- how to be a better leftwing Constitutional Nazi !  

The Mods are generally reasonable and cool, too. Welcome aboard and go for it!

If you get stuck unable to explain what you mean to someone making assumptions and projecting on you, PM me the msg or tag me with @ and I can try to help straighten out the language barrier. Either that or get us both labeled some new name for whatever we are! 

People here are generally workable with, even the ones deadset in their views who go on the attack to defend them.  I find if we take the time and effort to finish talking out where the conflicts are really coming from, even if it takes other ppl stepping in, I believe consensus is possible by establishing true respect first, then any issues can be worked through instead of creating a political traffic jam, then yelling and screaming in road rage.

Thanks in advance for your contributions here.
We need more people to have full discussions in detail,
to sort out what are beliefs that won't change from perceptions
and information that can be changed, and not use shortcuts
like insults or bullying to cut the exchange short.

Change is going to take real deep internal work
before we quit projecting outside ourselves and make
huge political messes over differences we should not be afraid to confront.

Thank you TheProgressivePatriot 
Hats off to you for reaching out and seeking
to build bridges on common ground
instead of more defensive walls for hiding behind.


----------



## Uncensored2008

emilynghiem said:


> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.



I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.



> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net



In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Uncensored2008 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.
Click to expand...



Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense. Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.

And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.

THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?

As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..


----------



## emilynghiem

Uncensored2008 said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.
Click to expand...


A. Dear @Uncensored the "Left" you see in public, the wealthy politicrats
are generally made fun of and despised as much by the  REAL left.

The Green Progressives are generally forced to lead their own movements and programs
independently because the Democrat Party is so hijacked by politicians and corporate interests,
nobody can get much of anything past that. Only electing key people who can play the Media
and if you don't follow the party line, there is no room for input much less discussion.

We are  probably against the same problems plaguing BOTH major parties,
and then affecting everyone else.

I personally cannot stand what the Clintons and now Obama have done
to sabotage the work of the grassroots constituents trying to build from the ground up
but being forced to compete with wealthy politicians getting in bed with corporate developers and interests
to tear down and hijack everything for power.  

We are sick of it, too!

I think we'd have to come up with a NAME for the "Commercialized Left" or
the Politicized Left that abuses the Party to push agenda for elections and talking points to tear down others.
I hear nothing but complaints from the Right about "career politicians"
pushing all the right buttons to get elected, and then going along with 'whatever"
is convenient to float in office, and not doing any real work. So sounds like the same mess
but in stereo, left and right.

Whoever is egging that on should stop, or you can't tell the difference
between the real Pitbulls and the Owners and who is really behind the attacks.

B. The real activists doing the work, guess what, you won't likely see in the media.

You would have to go out in the field to find the Green Progressives working with
the Libertarian Independents on issues of sustainable self-govt that the Media won't cover.

How can they? It doesn't fit into a "simplified" Left-vs.-Right sound byte.

So the Media cannot explain real solutions that require longterm collaboration
and careful economic and human resources planning to manage that level of infrastructure
and coordinating people and programs to make something actually work!!1

The solutions we want to be "spoonfed" through the media as easy fixes
aren't that easy in real life. Just be "prochoice" and outvote the "prolife"
or just be "progun" and outvote the "pro gun control".  That's all the Media can tell us.

It's like wanting Hollywood to sell us the happy ending we want to cram 
in a 2 hour script, when in real life, success can take 20-30 years to establish
a program and 50 more to make it sustainable and replicable where it is stable.

So what you see in the Media is the fake Hollywood romance
when in real life, to make a real marriage work isn't pretty at all.

There's a lot of fighting and struggling to work things out for the longterm.

Sorry @Uncensored but if you go by what you see in the Media
that's like thinking all people are romanticized like Superman or Wonder Woman 
or the Witch in the Wizard of Oz, or the Grinch.  We like to simplify
things "so we can make sense of our world"
but in real life, people and political reality are not simple caricatures we can label and be done with it.

It takes a lot more work that that.  A lot more.
You can't just label entire groups
to be "all good" or "all bad."

Whatever people are doing, each group is ultimately responsible for
fixing and governing their own community and programs, so we need to work with 
ALL of them to make sure they cover the membership they are responsible for representing.

Its like a whole ecosystem where each person and group
plays a special role, and we need to coordinate and not work at cross purposes.

It's not so simple as labeling an entire group for certain problems,
blaming and rejecting, and thinking you are done. We still have to deal with the problems
that divide us and cost all taxpayers and public more money if these aren't solved, 
so labeling and rejecting each other makes it that much harder to find solutions.

Believe me, as much as I cannot stand the elitists who profit so much off conflicts
and problems, we still have to work with the people running the business and legal
monopolies, including the media conglomerates, to get solutions going for the longterm.

There is not a single person or group on the planet that isn't needed
to share in responsibilities for fixing the problems we have today.

That's reality.


----------



## emilynghiem

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense. Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.
> 
> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..
Click to expand...


Dear TheProgressivePatriot and Uncensored2008 
What if we held both citizens, govt AND corporations/collective institutions
to respect the SAME Constitutional standards of
* due process and democratic right to petition to redress grievances
* limits and separation of powers
* checks and balances
* equal inclusion, representation, defense, and protection of the laws
* consent of the governed in resolving conflicts instead of bullying by exclusion or coercion

Can't we balance both freedom and responsibility not to abuse
our rights and freedoms where we start to infringe on the equal protection of others?

I see that neither the Right wants the Left abusing govt to impose agenda, political
beliefs and call it Constitutional Govt as long as it passes,
nor does the Left want the Right abusing the Constitution to justify
deregulating to the point where Corporate interests go unchecked.

The problem brought out by the Greens is the lack of check on
Corporations with both Personhood as individuals claiming civil rights
and collective influence on the same level as Govt but without the checks and balances!

So if we were to address the Corporate abuses of collective influence,
authority and resources (especially Courts and buying lawyers and judges in a legislative lobby
that monopolizes all govt if all decisions are controlled by lawyers and who sues or wins in court)
then that would address
* the Media
* the religious organizations and political parties
* the corporate lobbies and collective monopolies
* the legal and judicial monopoly
* the banking, financial and credit system and deals going on for politics there

Isn't that the problem? If collective Corporations have as much influence and power
as govts do, but without any Constitutional checks such as requiring due process, right to petition,
and not just "doing whatever they want until someone sues and WINS to make them stop by force of law or court order"

Why not address that source of "imbalance of power without check by the people"
and see how many other areas would be cleared up at the same time?


----------



## Uncensored2008

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense.



That you disagree is not the same as the sentence not making sense. My words were perfectly understandable to a reasonably intelligent person, and in fact you understand them fully.

In your arrogance, you believe that belittling is a valid form of argumentation, it is not, it is logical fallacy. 




> Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.



Leftism concentrates power in the hands of the central authority. In the case of the democrats, this means shifting of power and responsibility away from local and state government and into the hands of the federal government. Even on smaller scales, the desire to concentrate power into a central, ruling body is ever-present.

Take the Peoples Republic of California, for instance. It is fully in the hands of the radical left, with no viable opposition from capitalists or civil libertarians at any level.

So what have to socialist overlords in the state done? Centralized, of course. In pursuing the collectivist dream, the socialist overlords have gone to war against suburban housing. Following the lead of the Soviet Central planners, Sacramento has stripped localities of the power to zone, in an effort to force an unwilling populace into densely populated urban centers. By denying cities the ability to permit new housing in suburbs, the Soviet Central planners seek to force people into the large cities, to renting apartments from landlords, to break the independence of property ownership.

This is an example of top down control - which is a universal feature leftism - the absolute belief of any leftist is that they are FAR better suited to manage your life than you are.

The whole concept of central planners lies at the heart of socialism. 



> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..



Top down control by "the corporations" is a bit of retardation socialists like to feed the ignorant fools who buy into the venom spewed by the left.

How would the "corporations" exert top down control? What power do they have to impose any control? Further, if McDonalds tries to exert control, won't Taco Bell or Burger King move to counter that control as competitors? 

See, you haven't really thought this through, you are just reciting memes from socialist sites with no critical examination on your part.


----------



## Uncensored2008

emilynghiem said:


> A. Dear @Uncensored the "Left" you see in public, the wealthy politicrats
> are generally made fun of and despised as much by the  REAL left.



Emily, I don't see George Soros or the other powers behind the left "made fun of."

Further, when the left is ordered to back Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, the usual toadies will be fanatics in their service.



> The Green Progressives are generally forced to lead their own movements and programs
> independently because the Democrat Party is so hijacked by politicians and corporate interests,
> nobody can get much of anything past that. Only electing key people who can play the Media
> and if you don't follow the party line, there is no room for input much less discussion.



Building a coalition while excluding most of the productive segment would make the gaining of power difficult. Ultimately the left seeks power above all else. Identity politics such as the green movement is a manipulation technique, a divide and conquer strategy. The greens ultimately vote for the dims, even as they complain.



> We are  probably against the same problems plaguing BOTH major parties,
> and then affecting everyone else.
> 
> I personally cannot stand what the Clintons and now Obama have done
> to sabotage the work of the grassroots constituents trying to build from the ground up
> but being forced to compete with wealthy politicians getting in bed with corporate developers and interests
> to tear down and hijack everything for power.



We have spoken before. I am what I claim to be, a Libertarian.

I support and promote liberty - making me the arch enemy of the left. which seek collectivism and uniformity.



> We are sick of it, too!
> 
> I think we'd have to come up with a NAME for the "Commercialized Left" or
> the Politicized Left that abuses the Party to push agenda for elections and talking points to tear down others.
> I hear nothing but complaints from the Right about "career politicians"
> pushing all the right buttons to get elected, and then going along with 'whatever"
> is convenient to float in office, and not doing any real work. So sounds like the same mess
> but in stereo, left and right.
> 
> Whoever is egging that on should stop, or you can't tell the difference
> between the real Pitbulls and the Owners and who is really behind the attacks.
> 
> B. The real activists doing the work, guess what, you won't likely see in the media.
> 
> You would have to go out in the field to find the Green Progressives working with
> the Libertarian Independents on issues of sustainable self-govt that the Media won't cover.
> 
> How can they? It doesn't fit into a "simplified" Left-vs.-Right sound byte.
> 
> So the Media cannot explain real solutions that require longterm collaboration
> and careful economic and human resources planning to manage that level of infrastructure
> and coordinating people and programs to make something actually work!!1
> 
> The solutions we want to be "spoonfed" through the media as easy fixes
> aren't that easy in real life. Just be "prochoice" and outvote the "prolife"
> or just be "progun" and outvote the "pro gun control".  That's all the Media can tell us.
> 
> It's like wanting Hollywood to sell us the happy ending we want to cram
> in a 2 hour script, when in real life, success can take 20-30 years to establish
> a program and 50 more to make it sustainable and replicable where it is stable.
> 
> So what you see in the Media is the fake Hollywood romance
> when in real life, to make a real marriage work isn't pretty at all.
> 
> There's a lot of fighting and struggling to work things out for the longterm.
> 
> Sorry @Uncensored but if you go by what you see in the Media
> that's like thinking all people are romanticized like Superman or Wonder Woman
> or the Witch in the Wizard of Oz, or the Grinch.  We like to simplify
> things "so we can make sense of our world"
> but in real life, people and political reality are not simple caricatures we can label and be done with it.
> 
> It takes a lot more work that that.  A lot more.
> You can't just label entire groups
> to be "all good" or "all bad."
> 
> Whatever people are doing, each group is ultimately responsible for
> fixing and governing their own community and programs, so we need to work with
> ALL of them to make sure they cover the membership they are responsible for representing.
> 
> Its like a whole ecosystem where each person and group
> plays a special role, and we need to coordinate and not work at cross purposes.
> 
> It's not so simple as labeling an entire group for certain problems,
> blaming and rejecting, and thinking you are done. We still have to deal with the problems
> that divide us and cost all taxpayers and public more money if these aren't solved,
> so labeling and rejecting each other makes it that much harder to find solutions.
> 
> Believe me, as much as I cannot stand the elitists who profit so much off conflicts
> and problems, we still have to work with the people running the business and legal
> monopolies, including the media conglomerates, to get solutions going for the longterm.
> 
> There is not a single person or group on the planet that isn't needed
> to share in responsibilities for fixing the problems we have today.
> 
> That's reality.



The left and right have diametrically opposed view for how society should operate.

The right trusts people, and seeks to let people run their own lives. The left detests people and believes that only strict controls over people will keep them from exploiting the underprivileged.

The right views individual liberty as the highest good, the left sees empowerment of the group or collective as the greatest good.

The left and right seek the opposite outcomes. We either can be a land of individual liberty where all are free to do what they will, as long as it causes no direct harm to others. Or we will be a highly managed collective where central planners will place the needs of the environment, social justice, etc. ahead of the liberty of people. We cannot be both.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

emilynghiem said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense. Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.
> 
> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dear TheProgressivePatriot and Uncensored2008
> What if we held both citizens, govt AND corporations/collective institutions
> to respect the SAME Constitutional standards of
> * due process and democratic right to petition to redress grievances
> * limits and separation of powers
> * checks and balances
> * equal inclusion, representation, defense, and protection of the laws
> * consent of the governed in resolving conflicts instead of bullying by exclusion or coercion
> 
> Can't we balance both freedom and responsibility not to abuse
> our rights and freedoms where we start to infringe on the equal protection of others?
> 
> I see that neither the Right wants the Left abusing govt to impose agenda, political
> beliefs and call it Constitutional Govt as long as it passes,
> nor does the Left want the Right abusing the Constitution to justify
> deregulating to the point where Corporate interests go unchecked.
> 
> The problem brought out by the Greens is the lack of check on
> Corporations with both Personhood as individuals claiming civil rights
> and collective influence on the same level as Govt but without the checks and balances!
> 
> So if we were to address the Corporate abuses of collective influence,
> authority and resources (especially Courts and buying lawyers and judges in a legislative lobby
> that monopolizes all govt if all decisions are controlled by lawyers and who sues or wins in court)
> then that would address
> * the Media
> * the religious organizations and political parties
> * the corporate lobbies and collective monopolies
> * the legal and judicial monopoly
> * the banking, financial and credit system and deals going on for politics there
> 
> Isn't that the problem? If collective Corporations have as much influence and power
> as govts do, but without any Constitutional checks such as requiring due process, right to petition,
> and not just "doing whatever they want until someone sues and WINS to make them stop by force of law or court order"
> 
> Why not address that source of "imbalance of power without check by the people"
> and see how many other areas would be cleared up at the same time?
Click to expand...


Sound good to me. What about you, Uncensored?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Uncensored2008 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That you disagree is not the same as the sentence not making sense. My words were perfectly understandable to a reasonably intelligent person, and in fact you understand them fully.
> 
> In your arrogance, you believe that belittling is a valid form of argumentation, it is not, it is logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm belittling you? really? You need to grow a thicker skin. If I say that it does not make sense, I mean just that. No need for you to take it personally. Meanwhile, you fell the need to call Democrats "Dims" Do you really want to talk about logical fallacies.?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leftism concentrates power in the hands of the central authority. In the case of the democrats, this means shifting of power and responsibility away from local and state government and into the hands of the federal government. Even on smaller scales, the desire to concentrate power into a central, ruling body is ever-present.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong. I can't speak for everyone on the left but my sense is that the consensus is that there should be shared power among the various levels of government, and  a  balance of power among the branches of government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take the Peoples Republic of California, for instance. It is fully in the hands of the radical left, with no viable opposition from capitalists or civil libertarians at any level.
> 
> So what have to socialist overlords in the state done? Centralized, of course. In pursuing the collectivist dream, the socialist overlords have gone to war against suburban housing. Following the lead of the Soviet Central planners, Sacramento has stripped localities of the power to zone, in an effort to force an unwilling populace into densely populated urban centers. By denying cities the ability to permit new housing in suburbs, the Soviet Central planners seek to force people into the large cities, to renting apartments from landlords, to break the independence of property ownership.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no idea what is going on in Cal. Perhaps you would care to provide some documentation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is an example of top down control - which is a universal feature leftism - the absolute belief of any leftist is that they are FAR better suited to manage your life than you are.
> 
> The whole concept of central planners lies at the heart of socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Leftism" is by no means a failure. This country was built on leftist-progressive -socialist ideas and ideals. Read some history starting to Teddy Roosevelt and the progressive movement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top down control by "the corporations" is a bit of retardation socialists like to feed the ignorant fools who buy into the venom spewed by the left.
> 
> How would the "corporations" exert top down control? What power do they have to impose any control? Further, if McDonalds tries to exert control, won't Taco Bell or Burger King move to counter that control as competitors?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Retarded? Now again who is guilty of belittling someone? If those garbage food purveyors of obesity and heart disease were not regulated they would collude to maximize profit by paying slave wages, destroying the environment  and serving even worse crap to people. And they would buy elected officials from the local health inspector( if there still was one) to members of congress.
> 
> See, you haven't really thought this through, you are just reciting memes from socialist sites with no critical examination on your part.
Click to expand...


Any comments on Emilie's ideas


----------



## Uncensored2008

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That you disagree is not the same as the sentence not making sense. My words were perfectly understandable to a reasonably intelligent person, and in fact you understand them fully.
> 
> In your arrogance, you believe that belittling is a valid form of argumentation, it is not, it is logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm belittling you? really? You need to grow a thicker skin. If I say that it does not make sense, I mean just that. No need for you to take it personally. Meanwhile, you fell the need to call Democrats "Dims" Do you really want to talk about logical fallacies.?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leftism concentrates power in the hands of the central authority. In the case of the democrats, this means shifting of power and responsibility away from local and state government and into the hands of the federal government. Even on smaller scales, the desire to concentrate power into a central, ruling body is ever-present.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong. I can't speak for everyone on the left but my sense is that the consensus is that there should be shared power among the various levels of government, and  a  balance of power among the branches of government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take the Peoples Republic of California, for instance. It is fully in the hands of the radical left, with no viable opposition from capitalists or civil libertarians at any level.
> 
> So what have to socialist overlords in the state done? Centralized, of course. In pursuing the collectivist dream, the socialist overlords have gone to war against suburban housing. Following the lead of the Soviet Central planners, Sacramento has stripped localities of the power to zone, in an effort to force an unwilling populace into densely populated urban centers. By denying cities the ability to permit new housing in suburbs, the Soviet Central planners seek to force people into the large cities, to renting apartments from landlords, to break the independence of property ownership.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no idea what is going on in Cal. Perhaps you would care to provide some documentation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is an example of top down control - which is a universal feature leftism - the absolute belief of any leftist is that they are FAR better suited to manage your life than you are.
> 
> The whole concept of central planners lies at the heart of socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Leftism" is by no means a failure. This country was built on leftist-progressive -socialist ideas and ideals. Read some history starting to Teddy Roosevelt and the progressive movement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top down control by "the corporations" is a bit of retardation socialists like to feed the ignorant fools who buy into the venom spewed by the left.
> 
> How would the "corporations" exert top down control? What power do they have to impose any control? Further, if McDonalds tries to exert control, won't Taco Bell or Burger King move to counter that control as competitors?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Retarded? Now again who is guilty of belittling someone? If those garbage food purveyors of obesity and heart disease were not regulated they would collude to maximize profit by paying slave wages, destroying the environment  and serving even worse crap to people. And they would buy elected officials from the local health inspector( if there still was one) to members of congress.
> 
> See, you haven't really thought this through, you are just reciting memes from socialist sites with no critical examination on your part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Any comments on Emilie's ideas
Click to expand...


Quite a few, spelled out in;

Hello I am The Progressive Patriot Page 11 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## emilynghiem

Well, if you aren't friends with anyone on the left, you probably aren't listening
to the KPFT crowd that basically "rolled their eyes" and groaned upon first hearing
that Obama was going to compete with Clinton for the nomination.  Either way, ,, GROOOAAANNN

Cornell West is one of the few who can actually reach high enough on the radar
to be cited in the media as criticizing Obama. Most of the left is SILENCED by their own.

There are more ants than grasshoppers, but unfortunately
you will see the grasshoppers in the media scaring up all the attention.



Uncensored2008 said:


> Emily, I don't see George Soros or the other powers behind the left "made fun of."
> 
> Further, when the left is ordered to back Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, the usual toadies will be fanatics in their service


=========================================================================================


Uncensored2008 said:


> Building a coalition while excluding most of the productive segment would make the gaining of power difficult. Ultimately the left seeks power above all else. Identity politics such as the green movement is a manipulation technique, a divide and conquer strategy. The greens ultimately vote for the dims, even as they complain.



REGARDLESS who votes for what and who is in or out of office,
Uncensored2008 a truly independent, sustainable govt would not depend on party politics to get this person in or out.

The point is to own and build and manage business, schools and even prison and health programs
directly by the grassroots levels and work/train people all the way up to manage cities and states.

THAT is where people will be empowered equally
NOT by depending on "who gets elected in which cycle"

Govt work is CONSTANT around the clock.
Not every 4 years, not once a session.

Once you get that we the people have to be the govt we want to be in charge,
that changes the whole paradigm.

As for the Productive/Effective people vs. the ones "behind on the learning curve"
by setting up training programs, then everyone can be helped to move up the scale
regardless where we stand with social, financial or political development.

We need to QUIT exploiting the lower educated classes, and set up SELF SUSTAINING
means oof education and training where they DON'T depend on welfare, govt or charity HANDOUTS.

If people are going to truly depend on themselves to do right, and not depend on some
politician in govt fixing things for them while they run up costs doing things wrong,
the people need to be in charge of those costs by running their own district programs.



			
				U2008 said:
			
		

> We have spoken before. I am what I claim to be, a Libertarian.
> 
> I support and promote liberty - making me the arch enemy of the left. which seek collectivism and uniformity.[/quot,e]
> 
> The left want to use the Gov to cover the public so everyone is included in access.
> The better way to do that is to organize collectively but NOT fight through federal govt --
> instead organize around public radio, public schools, prisons and other places of likeminded populations
> that DO want to work together and create a policy they can all be served under..
> 
> The left happens to use the Govt as their "default church"
> the same way Christians would use their church networks to form a national or international umbrella.
> 
> So by separating beliefs by party, then each following can fund its own denomination
> and only use the central govt for things all people/parties agree on.
> 
> If the Left wants power, then run all programs through the Democratic Party networks,
> use that as the power base, and obviously that's enough to manage their own policies
> since the gays could organize that way, then all groups should be able to defend their rights and interests.
> Why not develop these DIRECTLY with the Party networks, elect, run and fund likeminded agenda
> that the entire membership agrees to follow "collectively."
> 
> Why not use that "collective" identity to empower the party members and leaders
> to build their own govt system and then they'v already won every battle.
> Instead of wasting billions on each campaign "against opponents"
> they can invest those campaign funds DIRECTLY into setting up their
> own health care plans, and prison reforms, etc. they can manage by their own beliefs by party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left and right have diametrically opposed view for how society should operate.
> 
> The right trusts people, and seeks to let people run their own lives. The left detests people and believes that only strict controls over people will keep them from exploiting the underprivileged.
> 
> The right views individual liberty as the highest good, the left sees empowerment of the group or collective as the greatest good.
> 
> The left and right seek the opposite outcomes. We either can be a land of individual liberty where all are free to do what they will, as long as it causes no direct harm to others. Or we will be a highly managed collective where central planners will place the needs of the environment, social justice, etc. ahead of the liberty of people. We cannot be both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I am saying to separate BELIEFS by party.
> If Hindus and Muslims don't agree on rituals and practice, then SEPARATE.
> 
> You don't see Buddhists and Christians "waiting until their beliefs get endorsed by courts or govt'
> before practicing them and investing in schools and programs, even medical outreach to help the poor.
> 
> None of this requires "going through govt before people organize it collectively"
> 
> So likewise any of the left or right who wants to do things in a way "not all people believe in"
> should have equal support to set that up for themselves independently.
> 
> Create your own business, school, hospital or medical education and outreach,
> or prison correctional program.
> 
> If it's set up as a school, and people voluntarily fund and participate,
> you can set it up according to your own shared standards.
> 
> I believe that's where society is heading Uncensored2008
> with the diversity of beliefs, and the resources we can organize now,
> community organizations can form, buy out property, and develop
> their own programs and quit fighting for control with other groups.
> 
> Let everyone have their own group.
> Let everyone have access to training to learn what
> it takes to manage populations of a school campus, before managing
> a city or state, BEFORE running for public office as a Governor Senator or President.
> 
> Since not everyone is at the same rate or stage of development
> we NEED the Parties to organize people of the same LEVELS.
> 
> This is POSITIVE to be able to organize people at 6th grade
> and high school levels separately from college level and post graduate work.
> 
> So if, for example, we are going to reorganize the mental health and prison
> system to manage the people who need 24/7 supervision by training security and medical staff,
> those participants are in a different program from the
> grad students in urban development, public administration, or business management
> who are learning how to build health facilities and operate a medical school
> where the interns earn their education by providing services to the public.
> 
> The LEFT will be happy to turn prisons into health care
> programs that more adequately study and address
> mental and criminal issues instead of wasting money on systems
> that don't work but just keep people poor and generate worse and worse crime.
> 
> The RIGHT will be happy to invest in BUSINESS plans
> and SUSTAINABLE programs instead of handouts that keep people
> dependent on charging taxpayers involuntarily.
> 
> Why not set up schools where people VOLUNTEER to invest
> (unless they are convicts who owe restitution and it is part of
> their penalty to pay proportional fines or labor into building such school-based programs).
> 
> Why not give taxpayers a BREAK for investing,
> or let investors earn interest like the Federal Reserve investors receive.
> 
> Why does everything have to be forced and negative.
> Why can't govt run by voluntary compliance by
> organizing systems that people WANT to invest in.
> 
> If they are paying billions into their parties, surely that
> money could go directly into the programs and reforms they are lobbying for!
> 
> By cleaning up corruption and abuses of contracts
> * with PRISONS -- that can pay for health care and education for more people
> * with Military contracts -- that can pay for VA reform and sustainable
> support for Vets by training them in managing their own housing and health services.
> 
> So why not let the
> * Libertarians and Republicans work on reorganizing the War spending to
> fix up the VA where it really works for the Veterans
> * Greens and Democrats redo the prisons with the goal of
> freeing up resources for education and health care.
> Any restitution from crime can go into developing educational
> facilities in each district; and from corporate destruction of environment
> can go into jobs and internships cleaning up and restoring after damage is done.
Click to expand...


----------



## Dante

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutionalist first and a Communist second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. The left is dedicated to top down control of the populace and the economy in the pursuit of "fairness." This is in direct conflict to the US Constitution and the guarantees of individual liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be a Constitutioanlist first and a Progressive second.
> 
> This is like saying you can be a Christian first, and a Catholic or Baptist second.
> or a Christian first and a Unitarian second, or even a Buddhist or Muslim.
> 
> The Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans and Unitarians may not agree with each other
> over the Trinity, Baptism or Communion, etc.
> 
> But if they put the central faith first, and their individual rituals and practices second,
> then their individual labels and denominational difference do not have to stand in the way
> of being united in Christ on the central policies that count so they can operate in unison.
> 
> Uncensored2008 what I might say
> is you cannot say you defend equal Constitutional rights for all people including free exercise of
> BELIEF, "due process of the law" (ie innocence until proven guilty)
> and equal protection of the laws from discrimination by CREED,
> but then go around and violate DUE PROCESS by condemning, punishing and excluding people
> in advance, based on a label, before proving what that person did wrong.
> 
> To do so would be invoking such "due process" for oneself, and equal protection of one's own beliefs and creed, while seeking to demolish the same rights of someone else based on your opinion of their beliefs. How does YOUR opinion of someone's label make THEM guilty of what YOU associate with that group? If our govt operated that way, and found us "guilty by association" we'd yell and scream. So why are we content to do this to our neighbor, when we would not want to be judged by the OPINION of someone else.
> 
> We have too much of this destructive counterproductive behavior going on in the name of politics.  If we are going to enforce Constitutional laws,
> and hold Govt accountable for "due process and equal protections"
> shouldn't we start with ourselves and make sure we respect the same standard principles.
> 
> see also ethics-commission.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a free society, people are free from discrimination BY THE GOVERNMENT. Where we go astray is when we dictate the thoughts and actions of individuals. I have no right to tell you who to like, who to make friends with. Free people decide who they will associate with and conduct business with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you seem to have some ability to string words together and for a sentence, it does not mean that it makes any sense. Top down control? Really. That would only be true if, by top down control you mean all forms of government regulation of business and finances, all environmental regulation, all civil rights and hate crimes legislation and all social entitlement programs. Am I right? Admit it. That is what you want. To do away with all of that. Basically anarchy. No government at all.
> 
> And if we did have, THEN we would have real top down control. Top down control of the economy by the corporation Top down control of the government by the wealthy who will sure as shit own it .And top down control of morality by the religious right.
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> As far as individual freedom goes, where the hell does that constitutional say that anyone has unlimited, unconditional freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want with no accountability. Now what you’re advocating is beyond anarchy. It’s not even civilization. Even primitive societies have, at minimum, social and cultural controls, as well as tribal rules and customs. You sound like a two year old who just wants to have what you want, when you want it and consequences be damned and to hell with anyone who comes out on the short end. Anyone who wants that is just stupid, and anyone who does not believe that it would happen if government there to prevent it is even more stupid..
Click to expand...


You totally lost Dante on "rich straight white people"

If you can't write or speak without using such idiocies you expose yourself as just another garden variety lunatic let loose with a keyboard or speech program


----------



## Dante

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.



Should have read the OP first:

let's boil it down:
"Not just the rich, native born, white, heterosexual, Christian, males." and "oppression"

what century are you living in? Are you rewriting some left wing commie rag?


----------



## emilynghiem

Dante said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> THINK ABOUT what you are advocating. Government for and by the rich straight white people. How the hell is that constitutional?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You totally lost Dante on "rich straight white people"
> 
> If you can't write or speak without using such idiocies you expose yourself as just another garden variety lunatic let loose with a keyboard or speech program
Click to expand...


Dear Dante and TheProgressivePatriot
Would it help to speak in more specifics.
Let's talk about the uproar caused by Donald Trump as one of these "stereotypical rich straight white people"
who believes the solution to stopping illegal immigration is to start by building a wall as a symbol of NO.

OK, so what is going to stop the
* illegal trafficking
* sweatshop and sex slave market
* gangs, cults and drug addiction and demand
* exploitation of poor workers with no claim to land to
get out the cycle of poverty, oppression and economic/political disparity

Just building a wall does not solve any of the causes or context around the problems.
Why not build city-states for the displaced workers to claim legal residency?

I am presenting the proposal to build educational and service internship complexes,
including military prisons, teaching hospitals and production facilities to replace sweatshops
and bring production back to the US Mexican border:
Earned Amnesty
based on the sustainable campus model
created, authored and passed into federal law
by POOR BLACK public housing tenants and volunteers

Dante and @TheProgressPatriot
I would be HONORED like there is no tomorrow but today
if you would join me in issuing a Public Challenge and BET
to Donald Trump that this campus solution would bring together
poor and rich, black and white,  left and right on correcting the
problems with crime, trafficking, drugs illegal immigration and other
corporate civil and criminal abuses violations and corruption.

I would like to make a 10 million dollar bet it will work
better than just mouthing off about building a wall.

And if this solution works better, then Trump would be
in charge of organizing the financing of it, through microloans
or restitution paid back for convicted violations, where the
workers and immigrants who want to earn legal status can
invest their resources and OWN the property and programs as shareholders
and legal citizens under an organized business plan monitored through
a school program similar to work-study registration and student loans.

He can be in charge of a solution, if we can prove this works better
than merely punitive measures that don't solve the economic or political problems
causing the glut and trafficking across our borders, affecting people worldwide.

Wanna make a bet? That regardless of people's views of poor minorities
or rich corporate conglomerates, we CAN work together and solve the problems ANYWAY.

Our love of our country and fellow man is GREATER than our differences.
we cannot let this differences stand in the way of working solutions,
when it is our differences that makes us such a rich, diverse nation.

Thanks and hats off to you!
Tell me if you are ready to do this, and we'll do it.

I've got friends with public radio ready to take on
big things, so why not???[/QUOTE]


----------



## emilynghiem

Dante said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good day ladies and gentlemen. I chose my name, the Progressive Patriot because to many conservatives seem to believe that they, and only they have the right to the mantle of “patriot.” In fact I’ve been told that it is an oxymoron.
> 
> I, however, I believe that progressives are the true patriots because of the fact that we have a vision of this country being truly great in all ways for all of our people I want America to be respected in the world as a leader in science, diplomacy, education, environmental protection and the evolving standards of human rights. I this to be a great and just country for all people, Not just the rich, not just the native born and white people, not just for heterosexuals, not just for Christians, and not just for males. FOR ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism is progress and progress is patriotism
> 
> At the time of the founding of our nation, at the time of the American Revolution, the rebels were known as the patriots. Those patriots were not content with the status quo. They wanted to move ahead, they sought to build a nation based on the ideal of freedom and democracy. Yes, they sought to throw off the yoke of an oppressive government , and yes, conservatives today-those who call themselves “patriots”-also seek to limit the influence of what they see as an oppressive government.
> 
> However, I will submit to you that today’s source of oppression is perpetrated, not by government per se, but by those forces within government as well as outside of government who seek to thwart progress, and worse, undue much of what has been accomplished in areas such as labor, civil rights, education, science and the environment. Patriotism is progress. Progress is patriotism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should have read the OP first:
> 
> let's boil it down:
> "Not just the rich, native born, white, heterosexual, Christian, males." and "oppression"
> 
> what century are you living in? Are you rewriting some left wing commie rag?
Click to expand...


Hey D RE what century we're in.
What about what State?

I live in Texas where the Confederate Southern Cross is one of the 
historic Six Flags over Texas.
The reality I live in every day, which has its strengths,
is the very one being attacked in the media,
The Good O'l Boy Conservative mentality to let all the different
groups do whatever they want on their own
and keep political agenda out of govt.

And my own boyfriend gets jumped on for being one of
these white males towing the GOP party line (even though
he is NOT Republican and NOT Christian).

When I bring up Constitutional education as a Democrat
I GET BLANK STARES

So this is the culture gap, the reality we are talking about.
I live that every day, and even have an entire thread on here
dedicated to accusing me of being a White Racist for
even suggesting reorganizing Freedmen's Town as a 
base for training minorities in Constitutional govt and 
financial/business management on a longterm sustainable basis.

That was just too "WHITE" an idea to come from
someone claiming to be an Asian volunteering in
a national historic Freed Slave church district.

Whatever this "WHITE" culture is, Dante,
people are yelling about it and projecting blame
for the economic and political disparity it REPRESENTS.

Regardless if it is REAL, it REPRESENTS the mentality and
the DIVISION going on, and we need to address THAT problem.

I've even been accused of enabling or becoming engrained
in it myself, whatever this rightwing Republican WHITE thing is.

G.T. and Impenitent both jumped on me and now
have given up arguing with me about it.

Whatever this is, real or imagined, I am even
being ACCUSED of promoting it, this white bigotry
anti-cultural diversity mindset that projects
"white man's culture" onto everyone else.

Everyone projects their expectations and values,
but it's the White culture that is jumped on for
being too dominating and precluding equal value on any others.

Like if you have a group of people, whether lost in the hall at jury duty
or running a meeting where the person who was supposed to lead didn't show up,
they automatically turn to the older White man in the group to take charge
and follow his instructions what to do.

Why is that? I don't know but that is what people are talking about.
THAT predominance or social conditioning expecting White Men to be in charge.

Still happens to this day.


----------

