Thursday, September 13, 2007

EXACTLY: What Kind Of Person Calls Himself 'Progressive'?

What Kind Of Person Calls Himself 'Progressive'?
By James Lewis

We all want progress. We may disagree whether gay marriage or drug legalization constitutes progress or not. But we all want better things for the world -- better food, better health and well-being, scientific and technical advances, wiser political systems, more peace and freedom, more happy children, more humane treatment of animals, more tolerance, more prosperity for the world, you name it. That's called being a decent person.


So what kind of person has to label himself "Progressive?" Obviously somebody who believes he (or she) understands real progress better than the rest of us. Because if you are a Progressive it implies that everybody else, let's face it, is a Regressive, or maybe just a Stagnant. It's a smirky, self-flattering way of saying you're a lot better than the rest.

more...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/09/what_kind_of_person_calls_hims.html

18 Comments:

Anonymous les ismore said...

BLITZER: How much longer will U.S. taxpayers have to shell out $2 billion a week or $3 billion a week as some now are suggesting the cost is going to endure? The loss in blood, the Americans who are killed every month, how much longer do you think this commitment, this military commitment is going to require?

BOEHNER: "I think General Petraeus outlined it pretty clearly. We’re making success. We need to firm up those successes. We need to continue our effort here because, Wolf, long term, the investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop al Qaeda here, if we’re able to stabilize the Middle East, it’s not only going to be a small price for the near future, but think about the future for our kids and their kids."

Anyone here willing to condemn Bohners statement here?

I dont think 3700 deaths of America's finest men and women is a small price to pay for ANYTHING.

4:57 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

LES--If you want your posts answered--or even posted--leave off the snarky 'crickets chirping' at the bottom (I have removed them). That's not really fair to me or my posters; you posted at a little after 4 a.m. our time here on the west coast...

If you can hold yourself together, you'll probably GET an answer--WHEN folks crawl outta bed!

P.S. Why is you've got time to be snide as hell up here, but tap dance over questions, and our answers to you, further down???

5:02 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

LES--In answer to your question, reread Boehner's statement. When someone says something is a small price to pay today, they invariably mean that something is a small price to pay today compared to what we would have to pay if we wait.

Thus, Boehner's remark is 100% percent true. You dizzy libbies think that war stops when WE withdraw and put down our weapons. No, LES, in actuality, war stops when the other side does.

5:08 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

WE didn't break 17 UN resolutions--for nigh on to 12 years--which that international authority had placed upon us. (They didn't.) WE didn't harbor terrorists like Abu Nidal. WE didn't pay off Palestinian suicide bombers. WE didn't threaten other nations with 'extermination'. WE didn't try to obtain WMD's with which to do so under the table and on the blackmarket. WE didn't invade Kuwait. WE didn't gas our own citizens and put them in mass graves. And, when offered TWELVE YEARS of chances to stop all these behaviors, WE didn't refuse to--and go on to threaten Israel and middle east peace, so don't try and compare our putting our weapons down with Saddam etc. putting theirs down. THEY picked this fight; WE did not--and we would not be there now but for THEIR actions.

5:26 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Secondly, LES--why don't you take a stab at addressing the topic of THIS article, instead of dragging in your own topic? You are going have people not want to respond to you if you keep addressing topics in drive-bys--without answering some of the very decent, long, reasonable, and well-thought-out answers you get from other posters.

5:29 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

NOW--I'm gonna have some damn coffee!

6:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I dont think you have addressed my question. Do you think that 3750 of our finest men and women is a small price to pay? Having been one of the few who have actually been touched by this war, I can tell you from first hand knowledge it is a huge price to pay and Boner shows incredible lack of empathy to the families who have paid that price. Period. Do you stand by his statement?

Also, I wanted to note with sadness the loss of 2 particular brave men in Iraq. Two of the 7 soldiers who penned the op-ed in the NYTimes were killed by IEDs at the latest report. Some wingers are saying they deserved it for writing that article. Will you condemn those statements as well?

8:06 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

LES--I addressed your question perfectly; you did not understand my answer. Again:

LES--In answer to your question, reread Boehner's statement. When someone says something is a small price to pay today, they invariably mean that something is a small price to pay today compared to what we would have to pay if we wait.

Thus, Boehner's remark is 100% percent true. You dizzy libbies think that war stops when WE withdraw and put down our weapons. No, LES, in actuality, war stops when the other side does.

8:11 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Second (I am separating these questions for easier reading... as seems needed...

Having been one of the few who have actually been touched by this war

IT IS THE HEIGHT OF ARROGANCE ON YOUR PART--AND SO TYPICAL OF THE VICTICRAT MENTALITY--FOR YOU TO THINK THAT FEW HAVE PAID THE COST OF THIS WAR--AND THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ONE OF THOSE FEW (UNLIKE, YOU SUPPOSE, THE REST OF US).

I rarely have encountered such elitism, such unfounded superiority--and such hautiness. You have NO IDEA what anyone--publically or privately, in their own mind and heart--has suffered due to this war--and nobody here is required to reveal that which would give them pain to reveal just so you could feel a few more people were on top of Mt. Olympus with you...

8:17 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Thirdly, you say Some wingers are saying they deserved it for writing that article. Please provide the URL to these claims, and I will then comment--IF what you say is true...

8:19 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

P.S. If you cannot understand LES--In answer to your question, reread Boehner's statement. When someone says something is a small price to pay today, they invariably mean that something is a small price to pay today compared to what we would have to pay if we wait. I would ask you in return, do you think it would be better to stop this war tomorrow IF your children's generation had to lose 30,000 troops to fight the same people, over the same issues, because America cut 'n run at the Democrat party behest?

8:22 AM  
Blogger Pat said...

Les, before this war started, liberals were screaming that 100,000 military men were going to lose their lives in this conflict. While ANY loss of life is horrible, and every life precious, the casualties of this war are extremely low, the price we've paid in blood is miniscule comparatively speaking to other conflicts.

What other choice do we have? If we leave Iraq now, just pull out and take our troops and equipment with us, Iran will take over lock, stock and barrel, because the stability and strength Iraq is building up has not attained the steely mettle required to stand on its own yet. So if we go, we are ceding the Middle East to Admadinejad, who has vowed to acquire nukes, to use those to obliterate Israel and then to move on to us.

We're next Les, what do we do then? Liberals are flat out wrong if they think leaving Iraq solves anything. It strengthens the enemy. We are up for a long fight and that is NOT President Bush's fault. He didn't create this enemy. He had nothing to do with creating Iran into the aggressive, fanatical mullahacracy it is. That happened in 1979 when Jimmy Carter was President.

Blaming President Bush for being a realist and for facing the facts the way they really are is pointless and stupid. Let's blame it all on President Bush and then if only we get rid of him, then end of problem, right??? WRONG!

Because he isn't the problem, radical, evil islamic terrorism is the problem and that predates President George W. Bush. You guys have spent the last 6 and a half years fighting the wrong enemy, who wasn't the enemy at all.

Furthermore, you put your country and every one of your fellow citizens in danger because of this stupid strategy. You also emboldened the real enemy, lengthened the war because the enemy keeps receiving mixed signals and believes we're on the brink of giving up and therefore keeps hanging on.

You're responsible for at least half of those 3700 deaths. We'd probably be done with this war by now if you'd have been on the same page as the rest of your country. The constant undermining of the Commander-In-Chief, the military, the United States' mission, our country's motives, your blame America first mentality have contributed to the enemy's will to fight.

You've encouraged them. Your behavior is treasonous, whether you know it or not. Why don't you try something new for a change, try shutting you mouth if you cannot support your country. Even that would be better than openly criticizing it during a time of war.

Patriots, who love their country, don't bad mouth their country at a time like this, when we're at war. Why don't you liberal know that????

10:33 AM  
Blogger beakerkin said...

At least the Duck is classier than the whiny Les.

Progressive is another term for Communist moron. The essence of this idiocy is alienation from America, logic and reality.

12:52 PM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Hi Beak! No, Ducky is the worst (duckshit just not yet in pellet form...)

How are you? It's my sis's birthday today! Thought of you on 9/11.

1:17 PM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Good for you, Patsy! That was a wonderful post and you said it all!

1:19 PM  
Blogger Pat said...

Thanks, Donal. These liberals absolutely disgust me. They thinks it's their right to slander and libel the top Commander in Iraq with a full page in the NY Times. They're all up in arms right now because they're catching some heat, even from some of their own supporters, for running that ad, calling General Petraeus a liar and accusing him of betraying his country. They think it is their right to print lies like these. It's not. What about the rights of General Petraeus and the American people to not have their Commander falsely maligned? Liberals and MoveOn.org aren't the only folks in America with rights and those rights don't extent to the infringement of others' rights. It's amazing how little these so called geniuses and elites really know about freedom.

2:57 PM  
Blogger beakerkin said...

I am back in NYC and can not speak of the horrors I see daily. Just know there are many folks doing their best in a horrible situation.

I sprained my ankle chasing the roach coach for some amazing pound cake. I did not get the pound cake either. Vocational food in NYC is a
local marvel.

Before I left Vermont I had those meaning of life posts on 9-11. I never imagined things would be so depressing in the local office.

The laws of assylum need to be scrapped to expedite these fraudulent cases that go on for years. Anything you ever heard from the critics is true.

I will take the Duck before Les. The Duck never cries and is manly.

4:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Les it seems you ducked the article. Why's that?

Morgan

12:13 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home