Progress towards what?
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
I have heard the term "Progressive" used in reference to people with social agendas, a term constantly sought amelioration for by those who seek to label themselves as such, but for them I would ask, "progression towards what goals?" Toward a future in space or rather progress toward some social "utopia"? I would rather have space than some ridiculous social agenda, but "progressives" seem to seek more of the "social progress" than progress towards the colonization of space and space-faring in general. Perhaps some want both, and I could see that, but the social agendas of many "progressives" seem to seek more progress towards eugenics programs and other crap we don't need than toward any useful technological progress.
Progressive is a polite word for socialist.
ruveyn
Dox47 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
The problem isn't with the word, it's with the people. Liberals even ruin the words used to describe them...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66a22/66a22f7ccac6a249c09e2d83c26465aa37fb0c13" alt="Laughing :lol:"
Sad but true, thing is liberals used to be called progressives until people knew what the "progressives" actually supported. Then to reinvent themselves they called themselves liberals, now people know what "liberals" actually stand for so they try to re-re-invent themselves. Problem for them is that people won't fall for it, because of individuals like Glenn Beck pointing it out.
Inuyasha wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
The problem isn't with the word, it's with the people. Liberals even ruin the words used to describe them...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66a22/66a22f7ccac6a249c09e2d83c26465aa37fb0c13" alt="Laughing :lol:"
Sad but true, thing is liberals used to be called progressives until people knew what the "progressives" actually supported. Then to reinvent themselves they called themselves liberals, now people know what "liberals" actually stand for so they try to re-re-invent themselves. Problem for them is that people won't fall for it, because of individuals like Glenn Beck pointing it out.
No one needs Glenn Beck to tell em about yet another ridiculous result of their politically correct agenda. Everyone already knows about how much liberals are about that. I know for a fact you like the dude, but now you're giving him way too much credit.
AceOfSpades wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
The problem isn't with the word, it's with the people. Liberals even ruin the words used to describe them...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66a22/66a22f7ccac6a249c09e2d83c26465aa37fb0c13" alt="Laughing :lol:"
Sad but true, thing is liberals used to be called progressives until people knew what the "progressives" actually supported. Then to reinvent themselves they called themselves liberals, now people know what "liberals" actually stand for so they try to re-re-invent themselves. Problem for them is that people won't fall for it, because of individuals like Glenn Beck pointing it out.
No one needs Glenn Beck to tell em about yet another ridiculous result of their politically correct agenda. Everyone already knows about how much liberals are about that. I know for a fact you like the dude, but now you're giving him way too much credit.
I know he isn't the first one to bring it up, but he managed to get the word out to people.
Inuyasha wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
The problem isn't with the word, it's with the people. Liberals even ruin the words used to describe them...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66a22/66a22f7ccac6a249c09e2d83c26465aa37fb0c13" alt="Laughing :lol:"
Sad but true, thing is liberals used to be called progressives until people knew what the "progressives" actually supported. Then to reinvent themselves they called themselves liberals, now people know what "liberals" actually stand for so they try to re-re-invent themselves. Problem for them is that people won't fall for it, because of individuals like Glenn Beck pointing it out.
No one needs Glenn Beck to tell em about yet another ridiculous result of their politically correct agenda. Everyone already knows about how much liberals are about that. I know for a fact you like the dude, but now you're giving him way too much credit.
I know he isn't the first one to bring it up, but he managed to get the word out to people.
AceOfSpades wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I can not for the life of me understand why liberal is such a bad word.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
I can not see a single definition of the word that is negative.
The problem isn't with the word, it's with the people. Liberals even ruin the words used to describe them...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66a22/66a22f7ccac6a249c09e2d83c26465aa37fb0c13" alt="Laughing :lol:"
Sad but true, thing is liberals used to be called progressives until people knew what the "progressives" actually supported. Then to reinvent themselves they called themselves liberals, now people know what "liberals" actually stand for so they try to re-re-invent themselves. Problem for them is that people won't fall for it, because of individuals like Glenn Beck pointing it out.
No one needs Glenn Beck to tell em about yet another ridiculous result of their politically correct agenda. Everyone already knows about how much liberals are about that. I know for a fact you like the dude, but now you're giving him way too much credit.
Would it have come out as much though if Fox News didn't exist? Probably not, which is why Fox News is so hated by the left.
I know he isn't the first one to bring it up, but he managed to get the word out to people.
Telekon wrote:
There is no such thing as a right-wing monetary policy (at least not if economics is treated a science).
Funny, most economics textbooks I see classify "policy advice" as the prescriptive (i.e. less scientific) part of economics, rather than the positive (scientific) part. And applied ecology probably has a firmer professional consensus and consistency of predictions than monetary economics.
Telekon wrote:
I said nothing about monetary policy anyway; if it were up to me, banks would set their own reserve ratios.
You yammered about unemployment. The obscenely high rate at which NAIRU is calculated is one reason why there is structural unemployment.
Telekon wrote:
America's cultural core is Anglo-Saxon. The laws, language, and customs are (for the most part) British in origin. America was never culturally informed by the aboriginal population since they had no common culture. They weren't even legal citizens until 1924.
Oh, really?
Telekon wrote:
As the demographics change the country will drift away from its British origins. Mexicans don't care about Constitutional law, the War of Independence or the 4th of July. They are cultural interlopers.
Well, it's nice to see that you're a simple minded bigot. And, news flash, Mexico is based on a republican constitutional framework.