21 2 mins 14 yrs

795151-936501-thumbnail.jpgA "Progressive" is the far-left face of today’s American Democrat. 

Obama is a Progressive.
George Soros is a Progressive.
Howard Dean, Head of the DNC, is a Progressive. 

The "progressive" looks to Big Government for solutions; progressives  seek to expand government-run social programs and curb  private "greed."  Progressives want to take decisions away from the individual and to put a "progressive" Big Government in charge.  "Progressive" is a replacement word for "liberal," minus the acrrued negative baggage of the modern-day "liberal."

Progressives linquistically like to frame their Big Government philosophy as "nurturing" or "ethically fair."  But "Progressivism" is simply a new way of saying "socialism."  History has shown  that socialism is neither "nurturing" nor "fair:"   Gulags of USSR,  prisons of Cuba, Mao’s Cultural Revolution etc. 

Socialism aka "progressivism" has wrought enslavement and misery;  free markets and individual freedoms  have brought happiness and prosperity to many.   (Poster image attributable to Shepard Fairy)

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

21 thoughts on ““Mommy?…What’s a ‘Progressive’?”

  1. free markets and individual freedoms have brought happiness and prosperity to many.

    and misery and enslavement to many also. lest we forget. patty its about trying to find a path through the middle. there are positives on both sides of the divide aswell as negetives.

  2. There is no path in the middle, Daytripper. Government grows. It does not shrink without great effort.

    Some people like to boss other people around, take other peoples money through taxes and spend it as they like. They think they know what is best for everybody else.

    The only way to protect against this natural urge of some people to steal others money for their own projects is to zealously guard and protect individual freedoms and rights and to push back against the constant growth of the government.

  3. Progressives also helped to overcome segregation, develop fair employment laws, promote worker and occupational safety, challenge corporate malefeasance, bring about voting rights for women, child labor laws, and various health, safety and environmental laws that have benefitted the nation. Plus they’ve got some great songs. The point one should try to deterine about Obama is not if he is or isn’t a progressive – but what it means when it comes to what he would do.

  4. There is no path in the middle, Daytripper. Government grows. It does not shrink without great effort.

    so whats the incumbents excuse?

    Some people like to boss other people around, take other peoples money through taxes and spend it as they like. They think they know what is best for everybody else.

    so whats the incumbents excuse?

    The only way to protect against this natural urge of some people to steal others money for their own projects is to zealously guard and protect individual freedoms and rights and to push back against the constant growth of the government.

    so whats the incumbents excuse?

    not that i hold out any real hope for obama. he has all the exterior credentials for "change" but i wont be surprised if he merely secures the status quo behind the front of progressivism and liberalism. afterall he shows no real signs of changing the direction in iraq, will no doubt skirt round a global financial industry that needs reigning in, and will all but avoid the major domestics questions of the era such as health care or energy conservation.

    i can see little changing in the whitehouse bar the name above the door. that name will be obama by the way.

  5. Some people like to boss other people around, take other peoples money through taxes and spend it as they like. They think they know what is best for everybody else.

    You must be referring to your ‘welfare’ program for Iraq that you cheerlead. After all that cost trillions of dollars and it wasn’t your money. As for bossing around, it doesn’t get much more bossy than hundreds of thousands of dead and millions displaced.

    Anyway that’s conservatives for you.

  6. Frank: Yes, I think the Bush Doctrine of preemptive action has and will continue to make me and America safer. And defense of the nation is one of the few things that Big Government should be mandated to perform and one of the few reasons that I think my taxes are justified.

    Mahons: "The point one should try to deterine about Obama is not if he is or isn’t a progressive – but what it means when it comes to what he would do."

    By determining that he is a progressive/socialist, it is obvious what he will do.

    He will grow social services, penalize "profit," — basically behave as a socialist. Unintentionally shrinking innovation, investment and "hope."

    WHile you seem to think that good intentions matter, I don’t. Socialized medicine, government expanded child care, mandated kinder care, etc. etc. It is all about robbing from the haves to give to the government – resulting in inefficiency, waste, and incompetence.

    And the one area Obama specifically states that he will shrink is the area of national defense – he is in favor, of jaw-jawing rather than action, rather like the UN – leaving the nation not only economically less competetive but militarily vulnerable – much like the EU.

  7. And defense of the nation is one of the few things that Big Government should be mandated to perform and one of the few reasons that I think my taxes are justified.

    why then have a socialised military infrastructure? why not privatise it completely and let the markets decide? im sure Nike would be more than happy to sponsor a war.

  8. Patty,

    "And defense of the nation is one of the few things that Big Government should be mandated to perform and one of the few reasons that I think my taxes are justified."

    And like you said, some people like to boss other people around, take other peoples money through taxes and spend it as they like. They think they know what is best for everybody else.

    It’s just somehow different when you do it.

  9. Frank: No. Up is not down. And down is not up. And snarky comments do not wisdom make.

    Defending the country, and taxing citizens in order to do this, is not "bossing people around." It’s defending the country.

    Huge difference.

    Now, maybe you don’t want to be defended. Maybe you don’t agree with that the BUsh DOctrine constitute defense. Intelligent people can disagree. BUt you can’t equate – say, state-run mandated kindercare with national defense. Well, you can…but it doesn’t make much sense.

  10. Patty,

    "Defending the country, and taxing citizens in order to do this, is not "bossing people around." "

    One thing at a time. We’ve already established that you approve of Big Government as long as it does things you agree with, just like Obama.

    Now then, is tax for defence taking other people’s money or isn’t it?

    "BUt you can’t equate – say, state-run mandated kindercare with national defense."

    I didn’t. Either you think taxes are taking other people’s money or you do not. It’s a bit convenient for it to be taking other people’s money when Obama does it and not when you do it. Now, if you do think tax for defence takes other people’s money, then clearly you think that such theft is OK as long as it is done for purposes you approve of. That would make your morals rather flexible.

    On the other hand if tax for defence is not taking other people’s money, then whose money is it?

  11. First of all progressive is another name for communism plain and simple read your history on the Wilsonian perod progressive movement which is the group they admit they derive that title from.

    Daytripper: name one country that is capitalist where it has brought misery and enslavement to many. Also please name the country where socialism hasn’t bancrupted the country and where they are not now reversing those policies.

    Mahons you have bought into the dream of what socialism could be but has never achieved because the powers that have run governments in the name of those ideals have always and will always be run by despots, secret police and fools.

    The Obamanation will bring disaster on both fronts domestic and international

  12. Troll,

    I’m curious about your response to Mahons’ list of accomplishments by progressives that you claim are despots, secret police and fools. Teddy Roosevelt? Susan B. Anthony? Bob La Follette? Hell, they were all Republicans!

  13. Alan
    I believe all those ideals are what should be stroven for when done by individuals. when ever a government marches under those lofty goals it is always followed by a seizure of guns and then all sorts of twisted despotic abuse

  14. Daytripper: name one country that is capitalist where it has brought misery and enslavement to many. Also please name the country where socialism hasn’t bancrupted the country and where they are not now reversing those policies.

    1. china, much of cold war latin america, much of africa. but i wasnt necessarily talking about specific regions.

    2. Scandanavia.

  15. Monica?Troll – Actually I have not bought into socialism. I don’t think that standing alone as a form of government it works. But I won’t dismiss progressives who have contributed much.

    Patty, I suppose you can label someone a socialist and then presume what they might do, but it won’t work unless you can point to actual facts. Obama may very well have policies and/or plans that won’t work, and if you got a little better on specifics you might convince some folks that he shouldn’t be elected. But merely labeling him a socialist doesn’t do it.

  16. Mahons: Surely you know that Obama’s voting record in the Senate – albeit a short stay but he has no other experience to point to – has earned him the label of "THE most liberal"

  17. Patty – he has a very liberal voting record, and at times it may very well be too liberal for me and others (recall I haven’t voted for him). That doesn’t mean he will embrace the generalities you claim.

  18. Patty,

    My view is that "big government" is a lazy phrase used by conservatives to attack government initiatives in areas that they disagree with – i.e. healthcare and education.

    As DT has pointed out, GWB has massively increased the size of government in areas he feels are necessary.

    Defending the nation is very important but Homeland Security and the war in Iraq – were they absolutely necessary? Some would say not.

    As a former lecturer of mine once said: the issue is not big v small government but "efficient government".

  19. Reg: This is what makes me a Conservative – I don’t think there is such an animal as well-run government. Changing the occupants in governmental agencies or even the nature of the agencies themselves will never result in efficient govenment.

    This is due to human nature.

    The USSR – the largest unintentional lab experiment ever launched – proved the point. And it is proved over and over, that despite good intentions, governments are inefficient, unfair, and often ineffectual.

    Therefore, as a necessary evil, government should be kept as small as possible. Individuals should be allowed maximum freedom over their affairs.

  20. Mahons: I have never said that I don’t support a strong military. National defense is one of the few areas I believe justify taxation.

    My understanding is that the USSR was brought down by its own interior decay, aided and abetted by our refusal to back down against the threat of soviet military aggression.

Comments are closed.