What is a "Progressive"?

[The T]

BTW, Ed Schultz supports the Keystone Pipeline, you should have watched more - but you're willfully ignorant.


progressive

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.

2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

4. going forward or onward; passing successively from one member of a series to the next; proceeding step by step.

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

HOWEVER GOVERNMENT produces NOTHING...so without THE PRIVATE SECTOR...where would that endeavor BE?

*FAIL*

 

[Wry Catcher]

What a dumbass comment (figures). I live in a 4 bedroom 2900 square foot home on 260 acres that I own in Montana and I will bet you a dollar to a donut that the "rich" couldn't care less. I worked for EVERY penny that I used to pay for this home - from working for those "rich" guys. They provided me with a fine living and I am forever grateful for their "richness".

Jesus, you envious bastards. I'll ask the same question that I ask of any other idiot that hates the rich - if YOU have a job (I am supposing that you live off Uncle Sugar) but IF you have a job tell me this (and be truthful): Do you work for a poor person? Do you work for some bum that lives under a bridge? Was the person who hired you on food stamps? Does he pay you in Food Stamps? -OR- Does he pay you from the profits of the company that HE invested in, used HIS money to start?

You might consider these things before you continually bit the hand that feeds you.

Now, head back to your refrigerator box - it's cold as hell outside!

Not everyone is as good at kissing rich man ass as you are, and boy I bet you can pucker with the best of them. Sarcasm aside, the person who saw their job flee to China has nothing to be grateful to the rich for. Same goes for the person who lost their retirement savings or thier house to medical bankruptcy. Most people who work do not get nice houses and huge tracts of land, they get the least that the miserly assholes can possibly part with along with copious reminders that you are just not worth a penny more.

Where the hell did you EVER get the idea that the job you worked at was "yours"? Where was it EVER put in writing that YOU have a RIGHT to anything? I personally know several people who lost their jobs to downsizing, moves to India and China and a host of any other things. Did they sit around and whine about their "bad luck" and the evil "capitalists" that "stole" their jobs? No. They picked themselves up, regrouped, and marched on.

You marxists live in a world of fantasy

Your tone is very angry, and I wonder why someone who (says he) has it all, has so much ire for those who do not. but there is no need to debate with you, obviously you are able to judge others having no direct experience with their lives, to suit your needs - whatever they maybe. The one comment I'll leave in response to your post is this, the "marxists" are the creation of people like you.

 

[Immanuel]

A progressive is someone who hates America and the principles it stood for in its first 225 years. A progressive thinks he is smarter than everyone else and dictates laws forcing everyone else to adopt his "morals". A progressive is sickened by any concept of individual freedom.

The Founding Fathers were progressives!

So, by your thinking, the founding fathers didn't believe in individual freedom despite the fact that the documents they wrote guaranteed our freedoms?

Are you crazy?

They may not have been conservatives with sticks up their butts, but they were not Anti-American Progressives

 

[norwegen]

BTW, Ed Schultz supports the Keystone Pipeline, you should have watched more - but you're willfully ignorant.


progressive

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.

2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

4. going forward or onward; passing successively from one member of a series to the next; proceeding step by step.

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

Oh, goody. Two examples. That advances are typically made in the private sector means that Progress doesn't depend on government.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If you are living in a double wide, the rich don't care about you, Cleetus.

I'm hoping on some level, you get that.

The rich are rich because we have a system where wealth accumulates in a few hands, and politicians can be bought. If you haven't figured that one out yet, you just aren't very bright, are you.

Have fun in your double wide, man. The possum hunt starts later.

What a dumbass comment (figures). I live in a 4 bedroom 2900 square foot home on 260 acres that I own in Montana and I will bet you a dollar to a donut that the "rich" couldn't care less. I worked for EVERY penny that I used to pay for this home - from working for those "rich" guys. They provided me with a fine living and I am forever grateful for their "richness".

Jesus, you envious bastards. I'll ask the same question that I ask of any other idiot that hates the rich - if YOU have a job (I am supposing that you live off Uncle Sugar) but IF you have a job tell me this (and be truthful): Do you work for a poor person? Do you work for some bum that lives under a bridge? Was the person who hired you on food stamps? Does he pay you in Food Stamps? -OR- Does he pay you from the profits of the company that HE invested in, used HIS money to start?

You might consider these things before you continually bit the hand that feeds you.

Now, head back to your refrigerator box - it's cold as hell outside!

Not everyone is as good at kissing rich man ass as you are, and boy I bet you can pucker with the best of them. Sarcasm aside, the person who saw their job flee to China has nothing to be grateful to the rich for. Same goes for the person who lost their retirement savings or thier house to medical bankruptcy. Most people who work do not get nice houses and huge tracts of land, they get the least that the miserly assholes can possibly part with along with copious reminders that you are just not worth a penny more.

No, butt plug. it's called getting an education or the right training. marketing ones skills to to highest bidder( employer) and fulfilling an agreement with said employer.
If that is 'ass kissing', you are on the wrong planet.
What job flee to China?
Can you name one person you know who is NOT working or is not employed in his or her area of expertise because their job has "fled to China"?
I think this "China" thing is a bit fat myth. It's a political tool used by the left to get votes from low information dunderheads.

 

[The T]

Not everyone is as good at kissing rich man ass as you are, and boy I bet you can pucker with the best of them. Sarcasm aside, the person who saw their job flee to China has nothing to be grateful to the rich for. Same goes for the person who lost their retirement savings or thier house to medical bankruptcy. Most people who work do not get nice houses and huge tracts of land, they get the least that the miserly assholes can possibly part with along with copious reminders that you are just not worth a penny more.

Where the hell did you EVER get the idea that the job you worked at was "yours"? Where was it EVER put in writing that YOU have a RIGHT to anything? I personally know several people who lost their jobs to downsizing, moves to India and China and a host of any other things. Did they sit around and whine about their "bad luck" and the evil "capitalists" that "stole" their jobs? No. They picked themselves up, regrouped, and marched on.

You marxists live in a world of fantasy

Your tone is very angry, and I wonder why someone who (says he) has it all, has so much ire for those who do not. but there is no need to debate with you, obviously you are able to judge others having no direct experience with their lives, to suit your needs - whatever they maybe. The one comment I'll leave in response to your post is this, the "marxists" are the creation of people like you.

Said a lot of NOTHING. Good form!

 

[Derideo_Te]

A progressive is someone who hates America and the principles it stood for in its first 225 years. A progressive thinks he is smarter than everyone else and dictates laws forcing everyone else to adopt his "morals". A progressive is sickened by any concept of individual freedom.

The Founding Fathers were progressives!

NO...they were Realists. Progressives DO NOT believe in Individual Freedom. The PROGRESSIVE track record belies YOUR statement.

The Founding Fathers implemented the "great experiment" with We the People governing ourselves. There is no way you can spin that as anything but progressive.

 

[The T]

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

Oh, goody. Two examples. That advances are typically made in the private means that Progress doesn't depend on government.

ONLY hindered.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Progressives are those who got so repelled by being called liberal they changed their name. Not much difference if any. Same thing they did with GW and CC.

You mean like the Tea Partiers who were so repelled by being called Republicans that they changed their name?

And what's in a NAME? PARTIES are the problem. TEA Party =CITIZENS fed up...YOU have a problem with that?

Your argument is with Freewill, not me!

 

[The T]

The Founding Fathers were progressives!

NO...they were Realists. Progressives DO NOT believe in Individual Freedom. The PROGRESSIVE track record belies YOUR statement.

The Founding Fathers implemented the "great experiment" with We the People governing ourselves. There is no way you can spin that as anything but progressive.

ONE aspect YOU forget...They recognized GOD was in charge...Progressives LOATHE the idea for it's one place they cannot control.

FAIL AGAIN

 

[Wry Catcher]

Where the hell did you EVER get the idea that the job you worked at was "yours"? Where was it EVER put in writing that YOU have a RIGHT to anything? I personally know several people who lost their jobs to downsizing, moves to India and China and a host of any other things. Did they sit around and whine about their "bad luck" and the evil "capitalists" that "stole" their jobs? No. They picked themselves up, regrouped, and marched on.

You marxists live in a world of fantasy

Your tone is very angry, and I wonder why someone who (says he) has it all, has so much ire for those who do not. but there is no need to debate with you, obviously you are able to judge others having no direct experience with their lives, to suit your needs - whatever they maybe. The one comment I'll leave in response to your post is this, the "marxists" are the creation of people like you.

Said a lot of NOTHING. Good form!

It appears your biases prevent an ability for you to understand; that's sad.

 

[J.E.D]

What is a 'Progressive'?

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.” -- John F Kennedy

 

[The T]

You mean like the Tea Partiers who were so repelled by being called Republicans that they changed their name?

And what's in a NAME? PARTIES are the problem. TEA Party =CITIZENS fed up...YOU have a problem with that?

Your argument is with Freewill, not me!

*I* was RESPONDING to YOU. Deal with it sport.

 

[Immanuel]

BTW, Ed Schultz supports the Keystone Pipeline, you should have watched more - but you're willfully ignorant.


progressive

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.

2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

4. going forward or onward; passing successively from one member of a series to the next; proceeding step by step.

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

And?

No one is talking about getting rid of the government just reigning it in.

 

[Nosmo King]

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

Oh, goody. Two examples. That advances are typically made in the private means that Progress doesn't depend on government.

Progress doesn't depend on government. That is to say government cannot legislate progress. But progress relies on government. Progress relies on the protection provided by the rule of law. Without enforcement, lunch counters would still be segregated, workers would still be needlessly dying in unsafe conditions, children would still be employed, rivers in the Rust Belt would still be polluted and individuals in minority groups would still be denied gainful employment.

 

[norwegen]

The Founding Fathers were progressives!

NO...they were Realists. Progressives DO NOT believe in Individual Freedom. The PROGRESSIVE track record belies YOUR statement.

The Founding Fathers implemented the "great experiment" with We the People governing ourselves. There is no way you can spin that as anything but progressive.

A self-governing nation is a sovereign nation. Progressivism is democracy, which is a form of government that eighteenth century Americans did not want.

 

[Derideo_Te]

To a progressive, government may progress. Doing so, it facilitates the progression of society. Fair enough.

That is a fundamental difference between us.

In the conservative mind, a constrained government with a permanent foundation (natural law) does not contravene society's progress. Progress doesn't depend on government; it depends on individuals. As Calvin Coolidge said, "We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them."

I understand and appreciate the many definitions of progressive that progressives have, but to my dying day, I'll never understand why anyone would want to put an end to a thing proved so lovely as our pre-Progressive Era government.

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

HOWEVER GOVERNMENT produces NOTHING...so without THE PRIVATE SECTOR...where would that endeavor BE?

*FAIL*

Government produced the vision, the incentive and the funding to put a man on the moon. If was left up to the private sector you would still be using a landline phone and the postal service.

 

[The T]

Your tone is very angry, and I wonder why someone who (says he) has it all, has so much ire for those who do not. but there is no need to debate with you, obviously you are able to judge others having no direct experience with their lives, to suit your needs - whatever they maybe. The one comment I'll leave in response to your post is this, the "marxists" are the creation of people like you.

Said a lot of NOTHING. Good form!

It appears your biases prevent an ability for you to understand; that's sad.

No I understand it perfectly. I think it is YOU that has the issue.

 

[freedombecki]

A progressive is someone who steps on other people's wallets to fund his own pipe dreams and isn't sorry if it is ruinous.

 

[The T]

It was government that put a man on the moon and in the process brought about the technology that you are using to communicate with in this forum.

HOWEVER GOVERNMENT produces NOTHING...so without THE PRIVATE SECTOR...where would that endeavor BE?

*FAIL*

Government produced the vision, the incentive and the funding to put a man on the moon. If was left up to the private sector you would still be using a landline phone and the postal service.

Yeah, they are now producing the VISION of total control over our rights, LIBERTY...and YOU applaud that as well, Don't YOU?

FAIL AGAIN.