If you were offended...
 

Paaaaaleeeese...thicker skin, huh...but I guess I could have said BUSH=HITLER and gotten standing ovations...I'll bet

do you really want to talk politics with those that think exactly like you??? might be easy on the mind just constant reaffirmation of what you think, great exercise for the jaw and head nodding muscles but might make the mind a little mushy...

Politics is ultimately about persuasion, isn't it?

Spence was kind enough to mention FDR

class...FDR was a ....that's right, esteemed democrat....a liberal democrat...he was a liberal democrat because he needed to distance himself from the PROGRESSIVE movement...hear that word a lot these days don't you???

"The Flip. Until FDR, "progressive" was actually the most common term used to describe the mainstream of American leftism. In what can be considered an early example of triangulation, FDR instead chose to call himself a "liberal," thereby poaching some of Hoover's turf while also distancing himself from the left-wing label "progressive." FDR thus changed the meaning of both terms in American political discourse, as the "progressive" label was rendered fringe left-wing, and the "liberal" label was tied to the economic policies of the New Deal instead of the laissez-faire and corporatist policies. From what I understand, Hoover was so outraged over FDR calling himself a liberal during the 1932 campaign, that Hoover challenged FDR to a debate entirely over who was the true "liberal" in the race. It is also important to note that when former Vice President Henry Wallace broke from the Democratic Party in 1948, he took up the banner of the "progressive" party. After that debacle, people did not call themselves "progressive" for some time" (from an FDR website)

this is very important...
It might surprise you but I was watching PBS the other night, they were running a story on the Roesenbergs....they commented in the story that the PROGRESSIVE movement in the early 20th century was the home of the MARXISTS, STALINISTS, LENENINISTS AND COMMUNISTS,
and there was the file footage of the PRORESSIVES marching in the street with their COMMUNISM signs and chants...now it was black and white footage and there may have been a little GRAY(Dad reference)
Liberal democrat FDR felt the need to distance himself from this movement

now follow along.....the Progressive movement is back, Howard Dean was in Europe a little while back giving a speech to the European Progressive Union, I read the text, pretty vanilla but...

Hillary Clinton has said time and again that she does not want to be called a LIBERAL but rather a PROGRESSIVE in the mold of the progressives of the early 20th century...now, I don't know if she's aware that the early 20th c. progressives were marxists, stalinists, lenininists and communists but she is the smartest woman in the world right? I know that she lies a lot but usually about things that will benefit her politically....now if this Dem Candidate (Hill)in her own words wants to be considered a Progressive given what we've learned, and she's widely considered the most centrist of the two dem. candidates...where does that put Obama on the political spectrum???:wavey:

just sayin'....

so keep on defendin' Rev Wright for his ...wait... are we doing that this week cause I think Obama finally after a close relationship over 20 years just sandbagged all of us and condemned the Rev. because he just now realized that what he was saying wasn't very nice....and now he's repulsive and not allowed to hang out anymore..

and whack Scott Wilson for sayin' marxism is unpatriotic

but someone please point out...I'm gonna make it easier, name a great MARXIST, STALINIST, COMMUNIST, LENNINIST and their great contributions to mankind....I'm waiting....(sound of foot tapping)

oh, and Capitalists that make their vast fortune and then decide that capitalism is bad and spend their time and money promoting Marxism and undermining capitalism, they don't count...George Soros would be the first to come to my mind

"If you don't like Wilson, you knife the land that feeds us all" PEACE

Where were you schooled?

Turn of the century progressives came from both Republican and Democratic parties. It was a movement away from pure conservative as well as pure socialist attitudes.

Hey everyone, ScottW thinks Teddy Roosevelt was a marxist :jester::jester::jester:

-spence

Teddy may have been a Progressive but Wilson redefined it...and FDR ...well we covered that...glad you are still with me Spence...I love the joust, you are a good guy, and did I mention that I love the pants???

" Wilson wrote approvingly in his magnum opus, "The State," "does now whatever experience permits or the times demand." "No doubt," he wrote elsewhere, taking dead aim at the Declaration of Independence, "a lot of nonsense has been talked about the inalienable rights of the individual, and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and pleasing speculation has been put forward as fundamental principle."

In his 1890 essay, "Leaders of Men," Wilson explained that a "true leader" uses the masses like "tools." He must inflame their passions with little heed for the facts. "Men are as clay in the hands of the consummate leader."

Wilson once told a black delegation, that "segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen." But his racism wasn't just a product of his Southern roots; it was often of a piece with the reigning progressive obsession with eugenics, the pseudoscience that strove to perfect society through better breeding.

Again, Wilson was merely one voice in the progressive chorus of the age. "[W]e must demand that the individual shall be willing to lose the sense of personal achievement, and shall be content to realize his activity only in connection to the activity of the many," declared the progressive social activist Jane Addams.

"New forms of association must be created," explained Walter Rauschenbusch, a leading progressive theologian of the Social Gospel movement, in 1896. "Our disorganized competitive life must pass into an organic cooperative life." Elsewhere, Rauschenbusch put it more simply: "Individualism means tyranny."


I particularly like that last line...

hey Spence, if it's OK I'd like to send you something, don't worry, it wont explode or cause any other kind of bodily harm, but if you want to, I had a buddy that wrote a fantastic book on early American patriotic and political china before he passed away, I think you'd really enjoy it, I purchased a bunch of copies from his wife and give em' out to folks that I think would really appreciate them, profusely illustrated, send me a pm if you want to and I 'll shoot, I mean send you one, thanks, Scott

Spence doesnt open the door for Jehova's witnesses and I doubt he would give you his address:rude:

I know that it drives the left nuts to quote JFK because they like to trade on his image, he would be a great Republican


Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy, State Capitol, Albany, NY
September 29th, 1960

It is an old struggle but it has a new form, and I think in the next 10 years or the next 15 years, in the lifetime of nearly everyone here, we will see an entirely different world picture than we see today. We will either see freedom on the ascendancy around the world, or other countries of Latin America and Africa and Asia will begin to move in the direction of China and Russia. And, therefore, I think it incumbent upon us to concern ourselves with the problems in New York, with the problems here in the United States, so that we build a stronger society, so that what we are speaks louder than what we say.
But we should also frame every action with reference to the world around us. The security of the United States is the basic responsibility now before us, and in my judgment that security can be maintained by the United States once more standing as an example to all mankind.
I am chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa of the Foreign Relations Committee, and every African nationalist 20 or 25 or 30 years ago quoted Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Now many of them quote Marx: many of them are Marxist if not Communists. Many of them believe that that represents the way of the future. What has happened to the vitality of the United States that they should feel that history moves in the direction of the most reactionary system of government ever devised? Why is it that we who represent the final flowering of the human experience in self-government should be regarded as a tired country, as a country which has seen its best days? I don't hold that view. think our high noon is yet to come. But I think if we devote ourselves to the public interest, if we are willing to bear the burdens which go with self-government and the maintenance of freedom in a country such as the United States, if we say that we will have a defense second to none, if we concentrate ourselves on building our economy so that we are the No.1 productive power in the world and maintain that position, if we provide equality of opportunity for our citizens, regardless of their religion and regardless of their race, then what we will be will speak far louder than what the Communist

mmmm, very telling:wave:

I am enjoying lurking in these joust err posts. Very interesting banter.

apparently, Nebe has decided that this forum is only reserved for high-minded liberals and lefty's who'd prefer to stroke themselves and eachother, that's cool, I have other things to do...

one last question...if all of this remarkable enlightment abounds on the left, unquestionable principles and and moral high ground, esteemed intellectuals leading the way, the well-schooled full of wisdom and able to promise anything necessary to get elected and threaten "loss of goodies" if not re-elected...why, oh why, in the last 40 years have there been exactly 2 democrat presidents elected with the names Clinton and Carter??? Carter.... well....and the opinion of the left sure seems to have changed with regards to Clinton but you can bet it will change right back if Hill gets the nod.....WHY SO LITTLE SUCCESS ?????

RESUME STROKING!!!

because.

It's certainly better described as "banter" than a "joust"...unless of course ScottW actually enjoys the chafing of soil under his armour.

Why someone who views the world only in extremes has such difficulty stringing together non-contradictory statements is beyond me, although, on second thought, it does make sense when applied in context of a process where reality must conform to an absolute for life to make sense.

It really seems as though 9/11 has exacerbated this new McCarthyism that's rotting us from the inside exactly as Bin Laden had hoped. Perhaps in the future some young and bright psychologist will label it and pharma will make their pill.

-spence

Die-agra would be a good name for those who are 'soft on terror'. Or how about Condi-cotin.. the ultimate 'pain killer'. Got a case of IRS anxiety? try Taxil. But wait, there is more folks... If you buy 3 bottles of Condi-cotin and 4 bottles of Die-agra, we will throw in a case of Tricky #^&#^&#^&#^&'s hair remover. because nothing controls your bush better than a good dousing of Tricky #^&#^&#^&#^&.

Follow the money rainbow and at the end you will find a pot of truth.

its getting too wacky for me, besides the fish are around, see you in Novemeber.