Man in Plaid

Anniston, AL

#5148 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>wow! does this mean that a the magazine "progressive farmer"(which really came into prominence in the 1930's-altho it was first published in the 1880's)was really a communist-inspired magazine?
Not necessarily. This magazine arose from Southern populism, which became a factor in politics in the last twenty-five years of the nineteenth century. At least in its early years, The Progressive Farmer, and other magazines of its kind, had a strong political bent. While the Southern populists were not embraced by Progressives such as Theodore Roosevelt, they had similar views on politics and economics. They typically supported high taxes on corporations and highly profitable businesses, viewed government spending as a form of economic stimulation, believed in the necessity of big government and a powerful executive branch, and highly favored wealth redistribution.

One of the major aspects of populism that has a clear Marxist aspect was the widespread desire for the federal government to seize control of all American railways and rail transportation. Another aspect of it that leads back to my earlier post was the dependence of political figures upon an underclass (often referred to as the "hick vote") to support their agendas. Think Huey Long, who was a standard-bearer for wealth redistribution and entitlement-based populist demagoguery.

While some incentives that populist figures such as Long pushed through can work, they depend heavily on government spending. Ultimately, the money needed to fund the entitlements that they depend on to secure the votes of the "poor" will far outstrip tax dollars coming in to the government coffers. Unfortunately for the people, those who enact such legislation will likely be out of office when this problem fully arises. As a result, these leaders leave the citizenry to deal with the devastating consequences of their desire to gain and keep power at the expense of his/her constituents.

Bear in mind when discussing the Populist party and Progressive politics in the US that the period from 1880 through the 1930s was rife with Marxist thought. Thus, if we look to history, we find that both of these terms (populist and progressive) are charged with a strong current of left wing ideology.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5149 Mar 25, 2013
domino wrote:
<quoted text>
Even though I totally agree with all that you and Aggie say, I usually only read and not post. I have strong beliefs about politics, religion,abortions and same-sex marriage. but I will keep those to myself. However, being from an all military family, I do not like anyone playing on words and thinking they know it all. I personally love the military and we were all George Bush fans. if some of these people knew what my family knows, they too would like George Bush. Wish I could elaborate, but I can't.
Thank you, domino. Those who are directly connected ALWAYS hold incredibly more "weight" than some uninformed, low information self-serving blow hard with an ax to grind.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#5150 Mar 25, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
He's a progressive which equals Boring.
+1

It also means clueless and uneducated...

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#5151 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Some are looking at Cyprus as the first domino to fall. Spain and Italy have reportedly also looked at seizing portions of bank deposits to alleviate their own economic problems. So now some are predicting possible runs on banks in those countries by people trying to prevent their savings being confiscated. And the Obama administration has floated the idea of taking over the 401K systems. 401K's are a huge amount of money that the Dems would love to get their hands on. Currently, all they are talking about is mandating employers who don't offer 401ks having to offer a government program 401k -(again, this is all being proposed only)- but given the nationalization of healthcare, is it really such a stretch to presume that if such a government 401k program were established that they would try and make everyone take part in that system rather than private sector 401k's?
If memory serves correct (it USUALLY does when referring to tax issues) the idea of "confiscating" $ from retirement plans was first discussed by Slick Willie...

I believe the rationale was that the "evil rich" had retirement plans and it "wasn't fair" that others didn't. Never mind the fact that some of us that weren't rich put money into retirement plans (planning for the long term) when it would have made life quite a it easier, financially, if we didn't...
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5152 Mar 25, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text> O.K. You can if you want to, as many others have done. I am used to it and I am also thick skinned up to a certain point. I do have my limits where I draw the line.
what are you talkin' about,dave? I just said that I was kiddin' ya about your sense o humor(dry,or lack of).man, do y'all ever ease off?good grief!!y'know it's not like we are deciding national policies here.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5153 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>not just that,but that any party,gov't,etc. needs to be willing and and should accept change(so long as it is a benefit to the majority)btw,i have never seen a progressive on a ballot).
About accepting change that is a benefit to the majority, that actually is the rub. What a liberal would see as a benefit to the majority, a conservative may see as a detriment to that same majority. While a sincere liberal (NOT a politician currying favor) may see more government assistance as a good and moral thing to do, a conservative may see it as simply entrapping people in a state of dependency from which it is difficult to escape. Welfare reform that Clinton was forced into by the newly Republican controlled Congress was a good thing that got many people off the welfare roles, but most Liberals called it heartless. Of course, now Clinton claims credit for the success. I will disagree vehemently with a liberal "civilian" while still recognizing the sincerity of their position in believing that what they think is the way to help people is valid. But when it comes to liberal politicians, that presumption of sincere intent is drowned out by their self serving hypocrisy.(example: John Kerry mooring his yacht in Rhode Island to avoid $500,000 in Massachussett's taxes)

And you're right, you won't see Progressive on the ballot. You will find few liberal (as defined by their previous self definitions) politicians calling themselves liberal anymore, progressive is the new term they use to avoid the negative connotations of "liberal."

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5154 Mar 25, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
If memory serves correct (it USUALLY does when referring to tax issues) the idea of "confiscating" $ from retirement plans was first discussed by Slick Willie...
I believe the rationale was that the "evil rich" had retirement plans and it "wasn't fair" that others didn't. Never mind the fact that some of us that weren't rich put money into retirement plans (planning for the long term) when it would have made life quite a it easier, financially, if we didn't...
Amazing what people will try to justify in the name of "fairness." And where does it end?
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5155 Mar 25, 2013
Man in Plaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. This magazine arose from Southern populism, which became a factor in politics in the last twenty-five years of the nineteenth century. At least in its early years, The Progressive Farmer, and other magazines of its kind, had a strong political bent. While the Southern populists were not embraced by Progressives such as Theodore Roosevelt, they had similar views on politics and economics. They typically supported high taxes on corporations and highly profitable businesses, viewed government spending as a form of economic stimulation, believed in the necessity of big government and a powerful executive branch, and highly favored wealth redistribution.
One of the major aspects of populism that has a clear Marxist aspect was the widespread desire for the federal government to seize control of all American railways and rail transportation. Another aspect of it that leads back to my earlier post was the dependence of political figures upon an underclass (often referred to as the "hick vote") to support their agendas. Think Huey Long, who was a standard-bearer for wealth redistribution and entitlement-based populist demagoguery.
While some incentives that populist figures such as Long pushed through can work, they depend heavily on government spending. Ultimately, the money needed to fund the entitlements that they depend on to secure the votes of the "poor" will far outstrip tax dollars coming in to the government coffers. Unfortunately for the people, those who enact such legislation will likely be out of office when this problem fully arises. As a result, these leaders leave the citizenry to deal with the devastating consequences of their desire to gain and keep power at the expense of his/her constituents.
Bear in mind when discussing the Populist party and Progressive politics in the US that the period from 1880 through the 1930s was rife with Marxist thought. Thus, if we look to history, we find that both of these terms (populist and progressive) are charged with a strong current of left wing ideology.
y'know ,if I could take this serious,then I would LOL,the SOUTH was in reconstruction at the time.carpetbaggers ran Dixie,and you're tryin' to tell us that Marxism was was was our concern.where are you from?

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#5156 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Amazing what people will try to justify in the name of "fairness." And where does it end?
IMHO, the FairTax would eliminate the ludicrous (unfair) tax system we now have, but I doubt we'll see it in our lifetimes...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5157 Mar 25, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
IMHO, the FairTax would eliminate the ludicrous (unfair) tax system we now have, but I doubt we'll see it in our lifetimes...
If only.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5158 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
About accepting change that is a benefit to the majority, that actually is the rub. What a liberal would see as a benefit to the majority, a conservative may see as a detriment to that same majority. While a sincere liberal (NOT a politician currying favor) may see more government assistance as a good and moral thing to do, a conservative may see it as simply entrapping people in a state of dependency from which it is difficult to escape. Welfare reform that Clinton was forced into by the newly Republican controlled Congress was a good thing that got many people off the welfare roles, but most Liberals called it heartless. Of course, now Clinton claims credit for the success. I will disagree vehemently with a liberal "civilian" while still recognizing the sincerity of their position in believing that what they think is the way to help people is valid. But when it comes to liberal politicians, that presumption of sincere intent is drowned out by their self serving hypocrisy.(example: John Kerry mooring his yacht in Rhode Island to avoid $500,000 in Massachussett's taxes)
And you're right, you won't see Progressive on the ballot. You will find few liberal (as defined by their previous self definitions) politicians calling themselves liberal anymore, progressive is the new term they use to avoid the negative connotations of "liberal."
I agree,but what really amazes me is that no one,nowadays,sess any negative connotations to the label of 'conservative'.it makes me wonder if there are any.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5159 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>I agree,but what really amazes me is that no one,nowadays,sess any negative connotations to the label of 'conservative'.it makes me wonder if there are any.
I think you're just being kind. There are some for whom the term "conservative" is synonymous with knuckle dragging neanderthal, bigot, religious fanatic, etc.(Just so there is no confusion, I myself am a Christian, but somehow in the Left's dictionary to be a Christian who actually thinks that faith should impact your decisions means you're a fanatic.)
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#5160 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>I agree,but what really amazes me is that no one,nowadays,sess any negative connotations to the label of 'conservative'.it makes me wonder if there are any.
Reference Informed opinion and Oh my, two of many posters.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5161 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Some are looking at Cyprus as the first domino to fall. Spain and Italy have reportedly also looked at seizing portions of bank deposits to alleviate their own economic problems. So now some are predicting possible runs on banks in those countries by people trying to prevent their savings being confiscated. And the Obama administration has floated the idea of taking over the 401K systems. 401K's are a huge amount of money that the Dems would love to get their hands on. Currently, all they are talking about is mandating employers who don't offer 401ks having to offer a government program 401k -(again, this is all being proposed only)- but given the nationalization of healthcare, is it really such a stretch to presume that if such a government 401k program were established that they would try and make everyone take part in that system rather than private sector 401k's?
the theory that will never die.if one falls,then the rest are sure to tumble,too.did'nt prove true in nam or anywhere else,but still has its' believers.Cyprus,a tiny island nation(@ the size of Atlanta,ga.,is the prototype of what we should soon expect here.logical I guess,in a way.new York,LA.and Miami-stand aside.Cyprus rules.
Thieves

Dawsonville, GA

#5162 Mar 25, 2013
Here's why our country is going to the dogs.

Alameda County rewards boss:$400k…for life

http://blog.sfgate.com/matierandross/2013/03/...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5163 Mar 25, 2013
Thieves wrote:
Here's why our country is going to the dogs.
Alameda County rewards boss:$400k…for life
http://blog.sfgate.com/matierandross/2013/03/...
That is stunning. And another example of why California is going bankrupt.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5164 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you're just being kind. There are some for whom the term "conservative" is synonymous with knuckle dragging neanderthal, bigot, religious fanatic, etc.(Just so there is no confusion, I myself am a Christian, but somehow in the Left's dictionary to be a Christian who actually thinks that faith should impact your decisions means you're a fanatic.)
can't speak for them or anyone else,except myself.i can see virtues to all different points of view.well,almost all.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5165 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>I agree,but what really amazes me is that no one,nowadays,sess any negative connotations to the label of 'conservative'.it makes me wonder if there are any.
Jeb, surely you jest. The libs on topix wear themselves out labeling conservatives.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5166 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>the theory that will never die.if one falls,then the rest are sure to tumble,too.did'nt prove true in nam or anywhere else,but still has its' believers.Cyprus,a tiny island nation(@ the size of Atlanta,ga.,is the prototype of what we should soon expect here.logical I guess,in a way.new York,LA.and Miami-stand aside.Cyprus rules.
Jeb, why is that so difficult for you to believe? Financially, Obamacare will not be sustainable and it hasn't been funded. People are already feeling the sting of higher rates and businesses are trying to determine ways to avoid paying for it. Obama INTENDS for Obamacare to get him into the history books and he'll stop at nothing. I can absolutely see the day when this could happen to us.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5167 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is stunning. And another example of why California is going bankrupt.
She'll get a pass from the libs on 'topox because she is a dem. They live in a double standard world, you know.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Blue Ridge Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Live Your Life 11 hr Bye-Bye 3
Fox 5 News at Fannin County Court House 15 hr Truth hurts 34
three springs (Jul '13) 20 hr Justus 35
This is scary! Must see Fri Prepper1 1
Rebel flags in town is also a joke (Aug '14) May 1 Timmy_ 220
Questions for Lanius (Mar '14) Apr 28 Mojo 124
Betty Bopster Apr 28 word up 4
More from around the web

Blue Ridge People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]