Poll: any progressives in ai-jane?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
No
0%
0 0%
Yes
0%
0 0%
Yes, let me get my rifle and I'll take care of that
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
any progressives in ai-jane?
#1
well?
#2
Well, I just HAD to go with the third choice. S6 In truth, there is one, who is 'self professed', and that it Chuck/Murdok. At least that is what he has stated numerious times to me. So I will take him at his word.

And actually, I thank him for his being honest enough not to call himself a true Liberal. Anyway, he is a Collectivist, but he is still my friend.

BTY, is he off again riding his 'social justice' high horse again? Perhaps he will return aganin soon and stir up the 'hornet's nest' once again, to the construnation of most members here. What fun! Wink1 S6
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#3
Please define "progressive".

Is it simply an opposite of "regressive?" If so, I'll vote "Yes".

Or is it just a nice sounding word, incidentally already exploited by both nazis and communists?

Or is it something else?
Sanders 2020

#4
Here is what the origional Progressive Movement was like at the turn of the 19-20th century. Today, self professed Progressives are really not like them completely, because they are really Fascists with a friendly face.

Personally, I don't care as I have an ulterior motive for it. I wish they all would quit calling themselves 'liberals' and flock to another label to trash. As a true Liberal, I resent their effort to hide behind something that doesn't represent them in the slightest.

Let them have the new label, and good riddence to them. Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#5
No. I'm sorry, but the word has been preempted. John Kerry was a "Progressive."

If I have to endure the lazy pronunciation of haRASSment instead of the original HARassment - then you have to understand the usage of a word defines the word. Modern Democrats prefer "progressive" over the term "liberal" because "liberal" has garnered a pejorative definition that pinpoints growing big government, increased government spending, high taxes as a solution to all economic ills, and embracing collectivist ideals - including placing reproductive privilege above the Constitutional limits that forbids such attention, and any number of interests which profit some collective group.

The term "progressive" does not refer to a Jeffersonian liberal anymore, it refers to McAulliffe, Kennedy, Pelosi, Kerry, and any other Democrat looking for protective coloration.
#6
Okay, if not "Progressive" or "Liberal", what would you call those of us who think the dems are too far central?
#7
Quote:Okay, if not "Progressive" or "Liberal", what would you call those of us who think the dems are too far central?-Z

In a word,.................Kook S6 Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#8
The correct term is Liberal.
#9
You're not trying to insult ME are you Bill? S6
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#10
What would be wrong with describing your political stand as 'Libertarian', John, it is something most folks find easier to relate to than 'Classical Liberalism', and then you wouldn't need to comment so frequently on collectivist 'kooks' being termed 'liberals'? :lol:
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
#11
John L, no - I don't mean to insult you, but you no longer have the option of assuming the "liberal" label without caveats explaining how you are not the accepted norm. At one time you could assume that tag - but you have to admit, even then you needed to add "Jeffersonian" in front of it so anyone could understand what you meant.

Tolkien would have told you that words and terms have roots, but they are like growing things and grow into a plant that looks nothing like the the root ball down in the dirt. Especially in the U.S. English language, where we accept all comers, words come from everywhere but assume meaning which is more than its original usage in whatever tongue it came from as we use it and new usage gives it life.

For instance a "gay caballero" has a meaning from usage that turns it into a homophone. In much literature, Don Quixote fits, in more modern usage, Richard Simmons fits. To write a book today, with that term, one assumes modern usage, unless otherwise prompted by the context - and even then, a good writer finds an alternative way of making the statement without dissonance.

In current politics, liberals who are correctly termed "liberals", recognize the term has a ton of baggage that comes with it - but instead of changing their philosophy or ideology - they attempt an end-run by claiming the less descriptive label of "progressive" as camouflage.

If my brother, Ron Lambert is around, he can probably give a better take on this than I can. He's a lot better with this subject than me. ...than I? See what I mean?
#12
Actually, for both Bill and Stroll, I am trying to rope in the language some, and pull it back to reality as it once was. In that I am truely a traditionalist. And Stroll, you and your German technical background for accuracy can understand that.

I think that it is simply terrible what the Collectivist Left has done to the language over the years. So, I refuse to acknowledge it, as are more and more here in this country. And it is working, but it takes effort and patience.

Same thing with the 'so called Gay issue. I NEVER use that word when referring to homosexuals, because it is an attempt to falsly have others think that they are enjoying themselves. So,.........for every homosexual who is really 'gay', I can easily find you ten who are simply miserable. It is in the genes, and they can't help it. But being intellectually dishonest is not helping things either.
Wink1 S6 Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#13
Is the 'discovery' of genes which cause homosexuality and misery simultaneously, part of the new 'scientific' findings promoted by the religious right? 8)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
#14
Quote:Is the 'discovery' of genes which cause homosexuality and misery simultaneously, part of the new 'scientific' findings promoted by the religious right?-Mv
Not necessarily Natee. But the truth is that Homosexuality is commonly associated with a number of anamolies. Homosexuals have an extremely high intelligence, earn the highest income per grouping, are the most creative(that's why they make the best Interior Designers, musicians, and artists). But they also have an extremely high incidence of mental illness, suicide, and early death due to illness. All these tallents and shortcomings are simply he11 on their bodies and minds.

I am in a group of people who are not ambidextrous, but(there's another name for it) have my dexterity in my left hand, and my power in my right hand. This group has the highest incidence of genuises, most able artists, very highly creative, etc, etc, etc. However, we have the highest incidence of mental illness, homosexuality, suicide, and depression. I am afflicted with depression, but am no homosexual, nor have I committed suicide, though I have attempted it once in my life.

So, I keep up with these things. And homosexuals are part of a genetic problem. As the old saying goes, if you are gifted with something more than others, you must also give up something else to equal things out. Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”
#15
Zyne,

I'm "progressive" as heck on social issues. I support choice instead of anti abortion,I wish the drug war was turned into peace,except for removing kids from the homes of obviously destroyed parents on Meth,etc
I think racism is the HEIGHT of ignorance,though I was a racist at one time. I have an understanding of the plight of black folks here,mainly due to my nephew's experiences of being a cop and his honesty when he tells me many black complaints are REAL,such as probable cause is being black and driving something more expensive than a VW.

On foreign policy,I am for using force when we must and I think we must now ruthlessly. I am a nationalist and isolationist 100%.I have opposed some US military moves,specifically in Kosovo recently and oppose most all we do together with Europe,I view that as insane. I'm against any US involvement in the Ukraine crisis,not our concern.

I'm for the supply side agenda domestically though,so that make me not progressive.
#16
There is no gay gene. Dean Hamer fudged the numbers - another scientist with an agenda.
#17
William,

I agree with you. There ain't no "criminal gene" either,IMO.

I do disagree with most Christians and most gays on WHY they are gay.

1st Romans answers this question for we believers lucidly,I am not sure WHY Christians misunderstand this issue so often. I understand why gays misunderstand it,but not us.

Back to my "progressiveness" on social issues,I also have said I oppose ANY government attempt to invade the privacy of gay ADULTS,we should drop sodomy laws,etc. I only oppose formal gay marriage as I will not accept a societal "right" based on a perverted sexual desire. I'm sure the non Christians then can say,"Who's to say they're perverts"?

The DICTIONARY,that's who.
#18
Don't forget the American Psychiatric Council which unilaterally proclaimed over a generation ago, without any medical backing, that the treatable sexual dysfunction known as homosexuality would henceforth be called normal and acceptable behavior. My brother Ron pointed this out in a post over a year ago, and also noted that a majority of the board at that time were activist homosexuals.
#19
Progressive:
I read the term was introduced to distinguish between the 'center left' (liberal) and the 'farther left' (progressive). Which means I may be counted in, which makes it 2 militants against 3 pacifists in the poll. :lol:

As for homosexuality:
One might as well consult the dictionary about 'homophobia' and 'hate crimes' while searching for 'pervert'. For those who still don't get it, I recommend the following article:
"BIGOTS ARE BUGGERS"
http://www.petertatchell.net/homophobia/...uggers.htm

Wink1
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
#20
Quote:There is no gay gene.-wm
Of course, there is no 'so called' gay gene. It is a complex combination of many that prevent the complex determination process shortly after the egg is fertalized and becomes an embryo. All the eggs are 'female' before the final 'setting in', some change to become male, and some remain female. The change over is where the problem comes in. That's why the percentage of male homosexuals are so much larger than lesbians.

The whole thing is just too complex to assign to only one gene. But rest assured, we WILL find it out eventually. And the Christian fundamentalists will be proven wrong. I am certain of that. Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Socialism always begins with a universal vision for the brotherhood of man and ends with people having to eat their own pets.”


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Obama's/Progressives War On Traditional America & The Constitution John L 9 3,009 05-28-2017, 10:38 PM
Last Post: John L
  Why Progressives Hate the Constitution John L 2 1,706 01-07-2011, 07:57 PM
Last Post: Palladin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)