Now was that really that difficult?
Printable View
Now was that really that difficult?
IF the Democrats want Steele gone, and the RNC want Steele gone, I want him to stay. If the DNC and RNC agree on anything it cant be good for anybody who believes in the United States of America our Founders believed in. Steele staying in charge until Jan. will drive Constitutionalists away from the RNC in the coming elections, possibly bleeding out the politicians that are all about politics as usual and getting new blood and new life into our political system.
That type of new blood and new life into our political system scares the bejebus out of progressives, D and R, who want politics to continue "as usual".
There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan's
Do you think if I make some cookies & Lemonade & offered it to the Afghanistan's that would be a start. :D
Found this interesting article that has a quiz to judge if you are
progressive or conservative in your thinking.
Jul 01, 2010
Defining ‘progressive’ in politics
The word "progressive" is thrown around a lot in Washington, sometimes as a less politically charged replacement for "liberal." But a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds that a majority of Americans are not sure what, exactly, the term means and whether or not it applies to them.
Asked whether the term progressive "describes your own political views," 12% said "yes," 31% said "no," and 54% said they are unsure. Six in 10 Democrats and 57% of people who described themselves as liberal said they are unsure if the "progressive" label is right for them.
Also interesting, many respondents who describe themselves as progressive oppose some of the same measures that, say, the Congressional Progressive Caucus – which is made up of Democrats – supports. For instance, 24% of those who call themselves progressive say they would oppose more government regulation of major financial institutions. More than one in three say that, "the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses."
Webster's New World College Dictionary includes about a dozen definitions for the word "progressive," including "moving forward or onward" and "continuing by successive steps." That leaves plenty of room for people to define themselves as "progressive conservatives," which, by the way, is the name of a political party in Canada.
The upper-case "Progressive" is defined as "a member of a Progressive Party," which this dictionary says is synonymous with "liberal."
The Washington-based Center for American Progress, which describes itself as being "dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through progressive ideas and action," takes one stab at a definition through this 40-question online quiz that purports to define participants as "progressive" or "conservative."
The poll was conducted June 11-15 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
Take the quiz......http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...sive_quiz.html..
Send Brock Lesner to Afghanistan.
Surprise, surprise. 121/400.
71/400 :eek: Eh?
And in typical, brain dead, 'progressive' fashion... Manipulate the language to get the results you want. LOL
A couple of examples. (Anybody notice you could not "select" the test on the webpage? One had to make the effort to type it out.... LOL 'Progressives' rely on LAZY people.)
As if the two are mutually exclusive? Either you make a profit or you benefit society? LOLQuote:
11.) The primary responsibility of corporations is to produce profits and returns for their shareholders, not to improve society.
What KIND of immigrants?Quote:
18.) Immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs and abuse government benefits.
This "test" cleary shows that the 'progressive' movement relies on people who are unwilling to take an active role in their government. They just use language to make people feel a certain way.
Like our dear leader has said... "Words matter" Indeed they do.
I had issues with those questions, and a few other as well.
Just like push polling, you manipulate the interview to get the results you want.
The question on terrorism was too limited, as were other questions involving international policy.
It was truly a "Progressive" test.
Yikes. A few guys getting lathered over some silly "quiz." No wonder they call them "regressive."
Why, if I didn't know better...I would offer them a buck to get a clue. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
A fine example of a "Progressive" response, when you have no intelligent reply, an insult will do.
ETA: Notice the "Progressives" didnt post their scores. Being forthright must be a "Regressive" trait.
I'll do it for you, ES.
Once again, here's a buck, go buy a clue.
Until you piped in I didn't see anyone getting "lathered". Now discussion is getting "lathered"? Amazing.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
(after all, I can't let ES use more rolly eyes than me....I am, after all, lathered)
I couldn't finish the test - thus no score. Couldn't finish it for the reasons given by LH and Puck. Many of the questions were worded in such a way . . . . similar to an automated phone call questionnaire I had the other day from our state Republican party.
And, of course, there is no one you can ask to clarify for you :confused:
Hey People, it's just a quiz. There is no pass or fail, it's just a quiz.
p.s. And there are no prizes.:)
I first heard the label "Progressive" here on PetTalk. It was used, of course, as a pejorative.
That strikes me funny as if someone is not progressive, are they regressive? Static? Stuck in the mud?
I am not one for labels and I don't determine my beliefs from quizzes.
I did not need to take the one sent in the mail recently by the "Morons Who Think Obama Is A Socialist" to know I didn't agree with them.
I just find it funny - taking a quiz that is blatant marketing - when you know you disagree with it - and then discuss it as if it is something serious.
It just a clue I got....:D:D
I took it, best I could due to the ambiguity of the questions; as others have said, the wording was very poor (purposely, of course). My score would not be popular. ;)
As for Michael Steele - I have confidence in the American people - they can count. They know how many years we have been sending troops to the Middle East and who was president when this mess started.
Far more interesting is the Republican Party's inability to learn from the past. You would think they learned from the Sarah Palin fiasco - chosing leaders based on demographics (a woman! good looking! she hunts!) is not a recipe for success.
So they wanted a good looking articulate black man as party chairman to counterpoint President Obama. Be careful what you ask for - you just might get it!
It will be interesting to see how they extricate themselves. I enjoy imagining the backroom conversation!
Yes, LH, R, b, PS - we all know you do not think President Obama is articulate or good looking.
Since when have I ever made any statements about Pres. Obama's rhetorical skills?
President Obama... Articulate? When the teleprompter is on, sure. But, so what? Good looking? I have no opinion. Does it matter?
President Obama... The absolute worst disaster our economy could have asked for? You betcha. Foreign Policy is important right now for sure. But nothing is more important than the economy. What the President and his merry band of morons are more than happy to keep ruining. But are they really to blame? Who among them has ever even run a lemonade stand. No, WE are to blame. We elect our leaders and the past couple of decades we seem to select the guy who lies the best and promises the most of other people's stuff.
President Obama is a direct result of our celebrity worship. He sounded good. He looked good... He is a unmitigated disaster. Unless you draw your livelihood from government. (Read: You live on taxpayers money.)
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39352.html
"What can the government do to create jobs." NOTHING. Let the people and business keep more of THEIR money.
All government can do is create MORE government jobs.
It takes 5 (at least) taxpayers to pay for one new government job. Do the math. Where does it end? What are we to do? 109 TRILLION and counting in unfunded entitlement liability. The baby boomers will probably make out OK. But what about the rest of us? Who's gonna crack first?
Baby Boomers.... What are you willing to sacrifice so that your posterity has even a sniff of a chance to live at least as good as you did? Social "Security"? Medicare?
But, I know... I am just a crazy hate monger. :rolleyes:
As I have said before... Don't take my word for it. Read about economics. What happens when a country gets to a point like we are? Our debt (on ONE set of the books....) is about 90% of our GDP.... Do the math.
Adams would never be elected now. He was shrill, short, overweight and annoying.
Ned Rutledge, however, would have been elected in a heartbeat.
Puckstop 31, You seem to be the only one with common sense here. :eek: I am counting the days when BO's term is up.
I should wake up blue and tell him, I finally found the "someone" with their
"panties in a bunch" that he talked about earlier. LOL.This is funnier than comedy Central.:D
Oh horrors, Obama has been Prez for a whole year and he hasn't solved
all the problems created by eight years of Bush & Co.:eek:
LOL. Liz... Your are worth the price of admission. Nothing to say, as usual, about content. YOU have any answers for 109 TRILLION dollars in unfunded liabilities? (Cough, Cough, due in large part to "D" policies)?
Hmmmmmmm?????? We all know you won't (can't) answer.
Did we miss the part were I said DECADES? Of course you did.
What is happening now goes back WAY farther than GWB.
And, in the biggest LOL for me... Your second 'statement' proves everything I thought about you. Carry on troop.
Only time will tell how BO did in office.
He can't be any worst then Bush.
I guess the question is, are most people better off or worst off then they were when Bush was in office?
Everyone needs to answer that on their own.
112/400 not that anyone is shocked and I don't give a flying fig how anyone feels about MY beliefs :) they are MY beliefs... not yours so get over it
Most public speakers, and most all Presidents, (that I know of) speak from
notes. Nothing new there. Obama also writes his own dialogue ,while most
Presidents don't, they have a speech writer. What they don't do is read
words written on the palm of their hands, like school children.:)
Blue I don't think that comment was racist, I think it is fact.
That is what the powers that be wanted and ES just stated the truth.
For a first black president we picked someone not too black, doesn't sound black, doesn't act like many typical black men living in the inner city.
I also don't think America would have voted for him if he was kohl black. OB is sort of a a mix not to dark not to light, so as not to offend the Archie Bunkers of this world.
Even blacks have a chaste system where they judge themselves on how black a person is. The blacker the less wanted by black men black women are. That is why many black women color their hair blond or red, straighten their hair. It is sad because they should embrace who they are. Michelle Obama would never die her hair blond, she is a beautiful black women and a wonderful role model for all women.
I am not trying to be racist either but many of us can tell if we are speaking to a black or white person on the phone by the way they speak. It's just a fact. Just like one can tell an inner city person person by their speech.
Same thing for a person in the north or south or west most of us pick up on the accent, does NOT make one better then another just different. People in Boston have a different way of speaking then people from West Virginia. People in Minnosota speak differently then people from Maine. And as far as the N word, the only place I hear that spoken is when I am downtown Cleveland. Blacks downtown refer to each other in those terms. Sad but true. A white person using the N word well I have not heard that in years except for Michael Richards and Mel Gibson.
Jon Favreau is Obama's speechwriter, has been for awhile now. Without Mr Favreau Barry is a mumbling bumbling speaker. At least Mrs Palin can get through a speech without "Umming" the audience to death.
The comment was based on the color of the mans skin, so yes its a fact that it was racist.
Interesting survey rankings of all 43 Presidents.
http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville...8/daily29.html
The mere fact that Presidents Clinon, Obama, and Johnson are ahead of Presidents Adams (both) and Reagan speak volumes about the political leanings and perspective (or lack thereof) of the survey group.
FDR? Mr. Big Government failure?
WILSON? Mr. "I interned more Americans than FDR did Japanese Americans during WW1?" WILSON? Mr. "Progressive Income Tax"?
Barack Obama #15, ALREADY? LOL
Its the greatest joke ever.... Certain people really believe such stuff. History is a cruel master sometimes. Facts are facts.... Regardless of how a group tries to change it.
Adams was a rather mediocre President... But he can justifiably pass the blame, partially on Jefferson. Our current Dear Leader and his merry band of idiots..... Worst ever, by far. ZERO "been there done that". And it shows.
John Adams was the weakest of the original leaders no doubt, but he had assistance from many quarters in that, not just from Jefferson.
Again, he was shrill, opinionated, and undiplomatic, which played right into his opponents' hands.
TO rank him below LBJ and the current President, however, is a complete farce.