. . . which applies to the “Progressive” philosophy in general.
Oooh, snap! Wilde?
Er… no.
Just because some progressives are racists hardly means the entire movement is discredited.
You appear to have misunderstood what I said.
So-called “prorgressives” promote policies that are the antithesis of progress. They should really call themselves “regressives”–they want to basically slow everything down (fiscally speaking).
And that’s the only way to speak, ain’t it?
Hold on to your hat for this- progressives actually believe that the policies they promote are good for progress. I know it’s shocking to you, but some people actually believe what you describe here are conservatives, not progressives.
No . . . But thanks for the strawman.
I know they believe that. They are wrong.
Yeah, I bet they don’t take sugar in their porridge.
Their Twitter feed says they’ve issued an apology to Chao, but their site appears to be overloaded and I can’t access it. Hope it’s good.
As a libertarian, Rand (thanks for the quote, people), you should know that the term progressive has nothing to do with the word progress, but is merely the opposite of conservatism. The difference is only do we change things (progressivism), or do we go back to what worked in the past (conservatism).
To make that relevent to the current situation: conservative racism wants things back to where they were, say, in the 50s, where all those other races knew their place. Progressive racism wants things to change, and promotes things like eugenics.
Your monetary policy is an old one, the Austrian model or thereabouts. That makes you a conservative. Whether you are right and your ideas would help create fincanical progress in this country is irrelevant.
Might even go way out on a limb and describe it as “improper”. Unless you think that’s too strong?
Ridiculous, even for you. You think people who call themselves “progressives” just want to change things, without also thinking that their changes would make things better (i.e., effect “progress,” if you will)? Plainly and obviously ridiculous.
You don’t see people going around saying “I’m a progressive, which means I favor no-pants Mondays and changing every speed limit to 37.5, just because I just want to change things, dammit!”
Um…
Oh, piffle! If either of you guys saw somebody declaiming themselves to be the United Conservatives of America, and offered a platform of guaranteed income, free food stamps, and voting rights for gay whales, you would instantly snap to the obvious conclusion that these are not really “conservatives”.
I don’t give a rat’s what this guy calls himself, he isn’t a progressive, whether he puts sugar on his porridge or just shoves it up his ass. What I’m seeing is a guy who wants to draw some attention and maybe get to the head of the line for running against Mr Turtle. And if he’s trying to appeal to the progressives of Kentucy, I doubt either of them is much impressed.
True.
So apart from the possibly racist tweet, what other aspects of this PAC’s platform lead you to question their progressive bona fides?
Platform? What platform? Where do you see a platform? I checked this out for at least fifteen minutes, and what I saw was this one guy trying to make waves. Their site hasn’t been updated for better than a week, and they didn’t exist…what was it, six months ago?
First guess, largely intuitive? Ambitious douchebag, type political, moving on the Main Chance. Gonna get to be more common, if trends continue leftward. For a very long time, the best move for an AD§ was the Republican Party, that’s a good part of why it stinks so bad. So, I expect them to gravitate leftward as the opportunity shifts.
Just another AD hoping to get rich and powerful as the champion of the poor and powerless. But I doubt he measures more than 350 millisharptons.
And so it goes.
Their raison d’etre appears to be the defeat of Mitch McConnel, which does not strike me as inconsistent with general progressive goals.
On the other hand, this blog post seems conciliatory towards the Tea Party in some key ways, so much so that I’d think i was talking to a reasonable moderate – or, as you surmise, a phony.
So you could well be correct. I was just hoping you’d done some research.
You think a conciliatory tone towards the Tea Party is the sign of a “reasonable moderate”? Cheese Louise, its worse than I thought!
I don’t think you’re going to see a Democrat elected from Kentucky in the next few decades, so the only way to defeat Senator McConnell is in the GOP primaries. Within the Kentucky GOP, would opposition to him come from the left or the right? Or perhaps, as an long-term senator, he’s got both bases covered.
When Elizabeth Warren is elected president in 2020, she’ll put an end to these shenanigans.