The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Carl on February 06, 2010, 01:58:56 PM

Title: Defining Progressives
Post by: Carl on February 06, 2010, 01:58:56 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7651323

Quote
omega minimo  (1000+ posts)         Sat Feb-06-10 12:34 AM
Original message
Defining Progressives   
   
Progressives believe:
In a "We"  :rotf:every thing you demand starts with me me me society; we're all in this together.
People are capable of self government and working together for the purpose of improving the quality of life.as long as you take it from someone that has more then me
Moving forward together is a good thing.

Conservatives believe:
People are basically evil that has been proven often
Government is a strong force that will only do harm.Another thing history has proven
Moving forward is bad, change is bad.


The concepts of civility and "PC" fit in here, too. Progressives recognize the value of inclusion and mutual effort. Conservatives believe the universe revolves around them.
The irony of this written at the DUmp where every semi juicy sh!t taken has to have a thread started asking WHY??? is just too funny

Stupid and pretty much to be expected nonsense but there were two posts by bridgit that are probably close to the most mind numbingly stupid and nonsensical things I have ever read.

Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm not of the opinion that "we" is a central component of Progressivism, and I hate 'isms'...
   as a practical matter - I do believe it admirably Progressive enough to hold the freedoms & enhancements of others & all to be central, and the forward motion of them so as to constitute what is Progressive and hence: progess - and if *that* is found lacking by the standard of someone else then so be that otherwise one may as well consider every bit as likely "Progressive" to be determined at the curb of our sidewalks where it is hoped our recyclables are separated in accordance thereto Progressive ideals

Quote
omega minimo  (1000+ posts)         Sat Feb-06-10 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. How does your view differ from "We're all in this together"?
In other words..."What the f...?"

She explains...

Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the...
   core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are

My head hurts.

Quote
omega minimo  (1000+ posts)         Sat Feb-06-10 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. exactly

In other words... Man you are one crazy sob!
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: franksolich on February 06, 2010, 02:03:19 PM
What the Hades?

The primitives are the most reactionary people one can hope to meet; look, for example, how they bitch and moan and whine and gripe every time my fellow alum Skins makes a minor change.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: The Village Idiot on February 06, 2010, 02:29:31 PM
Someone needs to slap bridget for that.  :mental:
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Freeper on February 06, 2010, 02:30:02 PM
Quote
Progressives believe:
In a "We" society; we're all in this together.
People are capable of self government and working together for the purpose of improving the quality of life.
Moving forward together is a good thing.

In some ways yes society is a "we society" but, we all are individuals with responsibilities to look after ourselves and the freedom to enjoy the fruits of our labor.

If liberals believe in self govt then why do they petition Washington DC to control everything? This statement from a liberal is ludicrous

Moving forward is fine as long as the movement is in the right direction, constitutional, and will not take away freedoms.
Quote
Conservatives believe:
People are basically evil
Government is a strong force that will only do harm.
Moving forward is bad, change is bad.

Well I will say people are born with evil tendencies good behavior has to be learned. I'm not even a fundie and I know this.

Government will only do harm when it is a strong force so you almost got that right, you just left part of it out.

Just like I said above change can be good we simply do not believe in change for change's sake like you libs seem too.

Quote
The concepts of civility and "PC" fit in here, too. Progressives recognize the value of inclusion and mutual effort. Conservatives believe the universe revolves around them.

Once again you have it backwards. Liberals are the ones who constantly say "me, me ,me" Obama is a prime example of this. Conservatives do recognize individuality but, we do realize not everything is about or for us. The left constantly gripes that us conservatives who aren't rich are going against our own self interests when we do not support raping the rich. When in reality we know if the rich lose their freedoms then we can just as easily lose ours. Besides we believe in the principle of freedom and that includes economic freedom not just the freedom to boink whoever we want which seems to be the only freedom that libs support.


Quote
omega minimo  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Feb-06-10 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Echoing the forgotten concept that    Updated at 12:34 AM
   
we ARE the government.

That's a cute slogan and yes the founders intended it to be that way but you would not like it if we had true majority rule.
Even if the govt is us, the constitution put a ton of restrictions on that which we can do.

Quote
mdmc  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Feb-06-10 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. exactly..
   
Edited on Sat Feb-06-10 12:58 AM by mdmc
If we really wanted to fix health care we should go to single payer system and have it run and staffed by pro single payer zealots.
Think of a national plan where everything is being done to provide the most efficient, highest quality medical treatment. Treatment provided for free and a net gain for our society as health and community improve. A better economy. Healthier schools. A better community, all in all.

Iiberals want to improve their community. Conservatives prefer the status quo.

But, who will pay for your free health care? See folks the liberals are saying "me me me" they want free health care.
Once again DUmmies that Constitution is screwing up your wet dream.

Quote
mdmc  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Feb-06-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. which is not in our best interest (:eyes:) --- so then
   
Liberals look for peaceful resolutions to conflict.
Conservatives are vested in the military industrial complex..

A strong national defense is right there in the Constitution. You don't like it? take it up with our founding fathers.
Peaceful resolutions are not always an option. Every conservative I know wishes that we could find peaceful resolutions to deal with terrorism we do not take it lightly when our brave service members have to do put themselves in danger.




Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on February 06, 2010, 02:46:16 PM
I'd have thought "Idiotic moonbats" would have been both sufficiently descriptive and elegantly concise.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: kenth on February 06, 2010, 02:48:09 PM
Man, that bridgit shore is smart.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Freeper on February 06, 2010, 02:50:28 PM
Someone needs to slap bridget for that.  :mental:

That primitive is bridget?
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: The Village Idiot on February 06, 2010, 07:16:47 PM
That primitive is bridget?
well bridgit

Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm not of the opinion that "we" is a central component of Progressivism, and I hate 'isms'...
   as a practical matter - I do believe it admirably Progressive enough to hold the freedoms & enhancements of others & all to be central, and the forward motion of them so as to constitute what is Progressive and hence: progess - and if *that* is found lacking by the standard of someone else then so be that otherwise one may as well consider every bit as likely "Progressive" to be determined at the curb of our sidewalks where it is hoped our recyclables are separated in accordance thereto Progressive ideals

We need a translator for that
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Specbid on February 06, 2010, 07:55:23 PM
Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the...
   core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are



Quote
omega minimo  (1000+ posts)         Sat Feb-06-10 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. exactly


HAhahahaha..."exactly"...right omega, like you understood that foolishness.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: The Village Idiot on February 06, 2010, 08:13:38 PM
Progressive: Pro (Professional) Gress (To go above or over) Ive (I've, I, me... all about me me me)

example: Professionally climbing over giant piles of crap to get MINE.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: jukin on February 06, 2010, 09:06:10 PM
Too late. Marx did it already.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: delilahmused on February 06, 2010, 09:53:26 PM
Their president is a perfect representation of who they are, all blaming and bitching, arrogance and stupidity between a series of I's and me's.

Cindie
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: MrsSmith on February 06, 2010, 10:28:54 PM
Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the...
   core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are

TNO...is that you???   :o :o :o
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: JohnnyReb on February 07, 2010, 04:45:23 AM
All I got outta that was...someone thinks they are the educated elite...and my thoughts or more correctly 'thought' on her expression of grandious verbosity is, Huh? 
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Alpha Mare on February 07, 2010, 05:07:57 AM
Progressive: Pro (Professional) Gress (To go above or over) Ive (I've, I, me... all about me me me)

example: Professionally climbing over giant piles of crap to get MINE.

 :clap: :clap:
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Freeper on February 07, 2010, 11:00:36 AM
well bridgit

We need a translator for that

Ohh I didnt catch that I thought that was in reference to the op.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: The Village Idiot on February 07, 2010, 12:54:37 PM
:clap: :clap:

thank you, thank you... I'm here all day usually ..  :bow:

Its My birthday you know.
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: AllosaursRus on February 07, 2010, 02:33:09 PM
E pluribus unum! That' all I have to say. DUmbass Idiots!


ETA: ( Happy Birthday FuGLe! )
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: The Village Idiot on February 07, 2010, 02:44:31 PM
E pluribus unum! That' all I have to say. DUmbass Idiots!


ETA: ( Happy Birthday FuGLe! )

heh... call me Floyd
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: delilahmused on February 08, 2010, 12:25:22 PM
Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the...
   core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are

Stoic-dense? What the **** is that? Stoicism is NOT being ruled by one's emotions and accepting one's destiny. Dense is thick or stupid. So does that mean they're destined to be stupid? They can keep that esoteric bullshit to themselves. I'm guessing this is one of those uber-quasi-intellectuals DU has running all over the island. I don't know the last time bridiot here had a jawbreaker but the inside of a jawbreaker is...more jawbreaker. Then again, they could just be living in a right wing existential nightmare where people are expected to take care of themselves...

Cindie
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Chris on February 08, 2010, 12:34:20 PM
Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are
:mental:
[youtube=425,350]MXW0bx_Ooq4[/youtube]
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: AllosaursRus on February 08, 2010, 12:34:59 PM
Stoic-dense? What the **** is that? Stoicism is NOT being ruled by one's emotions and accepting one's destiny. Dense is thick or stupid. So does that mean they're destined to be stupid? They can keep that esoteric bullshit to themselves. I'm guessing this is one of those uber-quasi-intellectuals DU has running all over the island. I don't know the last time bridiot here had a jawbreaker but the inside of a jawbreaker is...more jawbreaker. Then again, they could just be living in a right wing existential nightmare where people are expected to take care of themselves...

Cindie

Heaven forbid!!!!!111111

ETA:

Quote
bridgit  (1000+ posts)          Sat Feb-06-10 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. A baseline difference for me is that the notion is to be extrapolated outward as from the...
   core of a stoic-dense esoteric matter effecting, hopefully, others less-near the uber-principled centrality *of* that core - or as though from the core of a jaw-breaker out/beyond its event horizon; consider it a form of proselytizing: but a Progressivism able to reach beyond itself - and while a wonderful presumption especially when it fulfills itself; it is presumed that we *are* Progressive, we here, and so requiring, at least to my mind, no re-definition that we are

( HUH???????? )
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on February 08, 2010, 12:37:17 PM
Stoic-dense? What the **** is that? Stoicism is NOT being ruled by one's emotions and accepting one's destiny. Dense is thick or stupid. So does that mean they're destined to be stupid? They can keep that esoteric bullshit to themselves. I'm guessing this is one of those uber-quasi-intellectuals DU has running all over the island. I don't know the last time bridiot here had a jawbreaker but the inside of a jawbreaker is...more jawbreaker. Then again, they could just be living in a right wing existential nightmare where people are expected to take care of themselves...

Cindie

Damn, you got a lot more sense out of that pile of miscellaneous, unsorted words and phrases than I did.  I couldn't help but feel it was actually sapping both my intellect and will-to-live with each additional chunk of gibberish she threw into it.

 :banghead:
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: delilahmused on February 08, 2010, 01:12:56 PM
Damn, you got a lot more sense out of that pile of miscellaneous, unsorted words and phrases than I did.  I couldn't help but feel it was actually sapping both my intellect and will-to-live with each additional chunk of gibberish she threw into it.

 :banghead:

I was an English major. I speak fluent bullshit.

Cindie
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on February 08, 2010, 02:31:09 PM
I was an English major. I speak fluent bullshit.

Cindie

So's my wife, she really hates it when she says something weird and I screw with her by asking follow-up, cross-examination-style questions to pin her down and show her just how weird it was.

 :evillaugh:
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: AllosaursRus on February 08, 2010, 02:40:51 PM
I was an English major. I speak fluent bullshit.

Cindie

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!111111 Absolutely priceless Cin!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Defining Progressives
Post by: Wineslob on February 08, 2010, 02:41:48 PM
These "Progressives" remind me of Dr Science.

[youtube=425,350]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Elpbs6kb8Ys&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Elpbs6kb8Ys&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]