For the Progressives in the forum ...

[ViRedd]

Patriot Act, Torture, Abortion, Gay Marriage.. It's not unconstitutional as long as your party does it right?

And what about you, MWL, would you like to give us a glimpse of what your Progressive world would look like ... going along with the original intent of this thread, of course?

 

[ViRedd]

Come on Progressives ... what will your/our world look like when ego is politically incorrect and finally put to death? Answers please ...

 

[ViRedd]

No kidding. Great examples, MexcanWarlord. I just assumed examples weren't really needed, if you've been alive and not in a coma or wearing earplugs and blinders for the past 8 years you should just know.

And, you are making the giant leap of believing that George Bush was a conservative, right? I have news for you then ... GW was no conservative, my friend. The Bushies are closet progressives. You see clearly where that got us right ... and yet you are in support of the Obama administration, and that is like being in support of GW on steroids. Go figure.

 

[Leothwyn]

The nice thing about democracy is that we most likely will never see either side completely have their way - the extremes at both ends seem pretty crazy to me. Luckily they keep each other in check.
I know I'm not answering your question... but since no one seems to want to, I thought I'd throw a couple of cents in.
Personally, as a fairly liberal person when it comes to social things at least, I'd like to see a totally different approach to victimless 'crimes' - some should not be crimes, and others like drug addiction need another approach.

 

[ViRedd]

The nice thing about democracy is that we most likely will never see either side completely have their way - the extremes at both ends seem pretty crazy to me. Luckily they keep each other in check.
I know I'm not answering your question... but since no one seems to want to, I thought I'd throw a couple of cents in.
Personally, as a fairly liberal person when it comes to social things at least, I'd like to see a totally different approach to victimless 'crimes' - some should not be crimes, and others like drug addiction need another approach.

Well, thanks for the response.

I'd like to point out though ... that your take on victimless "crimes" and drug addiction is a Libertarian approach and not Progressive. I agree with you on that. But the Progressives are all for a larger and more intrusive government, not less government and more liberty as you espouse.

 

[tinyTURTLE]

maybe i was a bit harsh.
sorry for being so sour.

 

[tinyTURTLE]

maybe i was a bit harsh.
sorry.

 

[mundomania]

I'm not sure what I would label myself but here goes:

I'm curious ... If every one of your ideas regarding politics and overall government intrusion into our lives could come to fruition, what would the country look like? How would we be living environmentally, politically and economically?

1. Environment. How would we be living? What would our living space look like? What jobs would we be doing. What would our manufacturing base look like? What would we be using for energy? What would we be driving?

The environment will continuously go down the crap hole but at least the interests that keep the outdated technology in place will slowly lose grip.

Manufacturing will continue to be decimated once the carbon exchanges are in place. These fucks who just got a bunch of taxpayer's money can suck off more, targeting wealth producing companies.

You know, the same asswipes who just got their winnings because the money where the played at was run by a bunch of monkey fucking odds makers.

Perhaps the eventual audits of the federal reserve will convince congress to shut that place down after they realize that a whore houses with a bunch of strung out crackheads is more honorable.

2. Politically. What would our tax base be? How much influence would the federal government have over our lives? Would we still be a constitutional republic?

Consitutional republic? Your buying that? Wit soldiers still in Japan and Germany for over 50 years now, what interests are being defended? Using countries like Israel as guard dogs in regions is what republics do?

Actually the fiscal situation will fix that. It will get worse before it gets better.

3. Economically. What would the corporate tax rates be? Would American corporations be competitive with foreign corporations? What would happen to our unemployment rate? Would we experience shortages? Would you institute price controls to control consumption? Would we still have free markets?

Thanks in advance for answering. I'm looking forward to your answers.

Well considering it no longer is a capitalist system, we are going to see some weird shit on the markets in the coming year. If you think it's messed up now, man we are going to see a show.

Oh and if California can get their shit together, weed could be legalized within the next 10 years, yay (I'm being disappointingly sarcastic)

Maybe Obama can tell the school children cocaine is good as long as you don't get caught. A criminal record is a bitch.

 

[ViRedd]

ViRedd,
Your selective vision has steered you down the wrong path.
I have decided that you are snide and narrow of both sight and mind.
I'm not going to answer your question, i have no crystal ball with which to look into the future.
Furthermore, you know what answer you want, you want to twist whatever answer anyone gives you
so that it can be what you want it to be. The least effective way to make a cogent argument.
Though, i can see you have been learning from your ultra-right media leaders.
You are beneath contempt, beneath consideration and beneath notice.[/QUOTE]

Translation #1: "I cannot answer the question because I have no vision of the total implementation of what I espouse."

Translation #2: "I concretely have the vision of my future Progressive world in my mind's eye, and the outcome is so frightening, such a narrow, darkened little world, that I can't bear to say it."

Translation #3: "I am unable to fathom the question, so I'll just attempt to belittle the person asking the question through personal attacks. I'll show him who's boss!"

Wanna attempt to answer the question, big guy?

 

[doobnVA]

1. The Constitution is a static document. It's the Progressives that consider it to be a "living" document and subject to change by the courts without amendments, and that is exactly why it is, in your words, being "torn apart."

Dear jesus. Amendments ARE changes. The constitution was never meant to be static. I guess we can blame the "progressive" framers for that, huh?

2. The term "liberal" originally referred to liberals in the Jeffersonian sense. Today, they would be known as Libertarians. The Progressives commandeered the term "liberal" around 1890-1920 in an attempt to disguise their true Marxist agenda. As time went on, the term "liberal" acquired a negative sheen, so the Neo-Liberals changed the term to 'Progressive." This was around the Woodrow Wilson administration ... you know, the Progressive that gave us WWI, "the war to end all wars?" Oh, and he gave us the Federal Reserve Act and the progressive income tax as well ... all part of the Communist Manifesto.

Sounds about right, until you got to the "communist manifesto" part and disguising their "marxist agenda" (they didn't need to disguise the agenda, it was pretty well known that they were proponents of "social justice", if you will, but this doesn't mean they were communists)

That about covers it, unless you think I've missed something.

Now again ... try answering the original question that started this post ... if you can. Thanks ...

I still don't know what you're looking for. "Progressive" ideology isn't that much different than that of the liberal democrats. They think the people ought to have more power, the government ought to have less power, and generally support the notion of "social justice". Naturally this means holding corporations accountable, and easing the burdens of the working-class poor.

These ideas have no impact on the houses we live in, the cars we drive, or what sort of manufacturing we take part in, although both progressives and their liberal counterparts are proponents of environmental awareness so I would imagine there would be some kind of "green" initiative in terms of building and production.

All you really have to do is take a look at what's going on in the White House and Congress right now, as our current administration seems to value the liberal and progressive ideals above all others.

There are plenty of books/publications on these subjects, if you're really interested and not just trying to pull teeth (which is what it kind of seems like).

 

[tinyTURTLE]

ViRedd,
Your selective vision has steered you down the wrong path.
I have decided that you are snide and narrow of both sight and mind.
I'm not going to answer your question, i have no crystal ball with which to look into the future.
Furthermore, you know what answer you want, you want to twist whatever answer anyone gives you
so that it can be what you want it to be. The least effective way to make a cogent argument.
Though, i can see you have been learning from your ultra-right media leaders.
You are beneath contempt, beneath consideration and beneath notice.[/QUOTE]

Translation #1: "I cannot answer the question because I have no vision of the total implementation of what I espouse."

Translation #2: "I concretely have the vision of my future Progressive world in my mind's eye, and the outcome is so frightening, such a narrow, darkened little world, that I can't bear to say it."

Translation #3: "I am unable to fathom the question, so I'll just attempt to belittle the person asking the question through personal attacks. I'll show him who's boss!"

Wanna attempt to answer the question, big guy?

maybe i was a bit harsh.
sorry.

 

["SICC"]

he kinda made your point, just like you said, he twisted it around to be in his favor

 

[doobnVA]

Bush was in NO WAY "progressive". None. Zero. Notatall.

If that's what you think, then you've got the wrong idea about progressivism.

A progressive would NOT give tax breaks to the rich, or to corporations and other "big business". This totally goes against the whole concept of social justice.

A progressive WOULD NOT push us into a war over OIL (of all things!)

These are definitely characteristics of a conservative republican. He may have been "liberal" in his spending, but he certainly wasn't in his policies and ideals.

You even said yourself that progressives have a "marxist agenda". Bush stood for NOTHING that could even remotely lead one to believe he is progressive. Bush is the anti-progressive, if anything.

 

[MexicanWarlord420]

And what about you, MWL, would you like to give us a glimpse of what your Progressive world would look like ... going along with the original intent of this thread, of course?

I had some half assed reply typed up to your questions with little thought put into it that I didn't post. I'll put some effort into answering them when I get back from vacation.

 

[mundomania]

Ah, a good fight over labels.

 

[doobnVA]

Ah, a good fight over labels.

Well, branding is important... in capitalism, at least.

Our 2 party system adds substantially to the labelfest, as well. How else are rational, thinking people going to distance themselves from the crazies who share their "political party"?

 

[doobnVA]

In MY progressive world, we'd have a universal health plan. We'd use RENEWABLE energy instead of fossil fuels, everyone would have an affordable college education and nobody would graduate with $100,000 dollars worth of debt. We'd build BETTER homes that last longer and aren't made from toxic materials, excess (in all things) would be discouraged and frowned upon, people would be responsible for their OWN well being and safety (no more police state), and I'd trade Hollywood to Mexico (Hey, at least the Mexicans WORK for their money, right?).

 

[Parker]

Patriot Act, Torture, Abortion, Gay Marriage.. It's not unconstitutional as long as your party does it right?

Preach on brother. The ole except for me clause.

 

[mundomania]

Well, branding is important... in capitalism, at least.

Our 2 party system adds substantially to the labelfest, as well. How else are rational, thinking people going to distance themselves from the crazies who share their "political party"?

And you fall right into that trap by focusing on that shit instead of the real issues.

Just stop paying attention to fox, cnn, msnbc and any other "news" outlet. and stop this label nonsense.

 

[natrone23]

I want to get off foreign oil and coal as soon as possible that means transitioning away from oil(transportation) and coal(power generation).

I want to fast track nuclear power plant building, natural gas production, solar, wind.


I mean actually doing it not just shuffling are feat along like the U.S is doing now.