Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

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

Jesup, 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

Jesup, 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

Fitzgerald, 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

Jesup, 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

Fitzgerald, 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

Jesup, 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.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

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.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

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.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

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.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#5168 Mar 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for that documentation.
Otherwise it's simply creating a Straw Man and attacking him. That tactic that gets you an "F" in high school debate class, and as a result not persuasive at all.
It always comes back to those pesky facts, and not including facts simply demonstrates none exist to support the argument.
Here is an example of pesky facts.
I have a copy of the progressive platform of 1912 and quotes directly from the U.S.A. Communist Party website. Compare them and anyone can see that they are still the same. Even with the passing of time the ideals and big government control over everyone's lives are the same. There is always a cause for so called justice and anti-capitalism always with the government taking charge and getting bigger and bigger.
Of course they have enacted some good laws, they have to to give validity to their cause.
Anyone that has ever been to Communist countries or where Communist are trying to take over knows that they lie and kill to get what they want. Only a tiny step from Socialism to full blown Communism.
I say that the progressive Party as gone through name changes from the Progressive Party, to the Socialist Workers Party, to the Communist Party, and now back to and intertwined again with the Progressive Party. Anyone that can read will see the uncanny resemblances between them. Nothing to changing a name and calling yourself something else. You still look the same.
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/in...

http://www.cpusa.org/faq/
Man in Plaid

Phenix City, AL

#5169 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>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?
I simply disagreed with your assertion that the Progressive Farmer magazine is an example of the term "progressive" that lacks the leftist connotation that an earlier poster suggested.

My post states that the Progressive Farmer did in fact have a political agenda in its early years, and it leaned toward the left. It also points out that populism, which was very popular in Southern politics, and the progressive liberalism of T. Roosevelt, Wilson, and F. Roosevelt worked from a similar leftist foundation. In this regard, left wing ideologies were indeed a Southern concern because of the populist tenor of much of the region's politics during the period I mentioned. In fact, the three most famous political figures associated with the South, Bryan (though he was born in Illinois), Wilson, and Long were all three considered stellar examples of liberal politicians But, many current leftists would likely disagree with Bryan's fervent Christian fundamentalism. In fact, I'd say that one can find discussions of Long's "Share Our Wealth" initiatives on progressive, liberal, and socialist political sites. There might even be a few parallels drawn between Long's wealth sharing and Obama's desire to spread the wealth around.

Also, by mid 1877, which is around two and a half years before the publication of the Progressive Farmer, the Democrats regained power in every Southern state government, so most sources will declare the period of reconstruction over by then, and in some states reconstruction ended earlier. Although you can argue that the effects of reconstruction were felt afterward, Southerners had political control of the region by the 1880s. By the early 1900s, Southern states had overturned reconstruction constitutions and began to implement disenfranchisement laws against black citizens. The carpetbaggers and radical abolitionists were gone by the mid 1870s. Hence, they did not "run Dixie" during the time I mentioned in my previous post.

Finally by the end of the twentieth century, throughout the WWI era, and beyond Marxism was viewed as a major concern to the American government as a whole, especially with the influx of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. And, with the recent success of progressive democrats, I would say the threat is as vibrant as it has ever been.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#5170 Mar 25, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Don't be so serious. I was just making the point that if you should not agree with me, its O.K. You can go after me. Make your point but make a good one. I could write something stupid, but I probably won't. lol
Farrell Landon

Washington, DC

#5171 Mar 25, 2013
Tallywhacker playin with has become an epidimic in america. Gotta propse leguslation to try and slow the playin of tallywhackers in this country. We need to apooint a tallywhacker czar and study and try to stop all the tallywhacker playin with

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#5172 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.
Yes, there are those that wish to dip into American workers retirement plans. Especially 401k's.
http://www.examiner.com/article/401k-plans-an...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5173 Mar 25, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is an example of pesky facts.
I have a copy of the progressive platform of 1912 and quotes directly from the U.S.A. Communist Party website. Compare them and anyone can see that they are still the same. Even with the passing of time the ideals and big government control over everyone's lives are the same. There is always a cause for so called justice and anti-capitalism always with the government taking charge and getting bigger and bigger.
Of course they have enacted some good laws, they have to to give validity to their cause.
Anyone that has ever been to Communist countries or where Communist are trying to take over knows that they lie and kill to get what they want. Only a tiny step from Socialism to full blown Communism.
I say that the progressive Party as gone through name changes from the Progressive Party, to the Socialist Workers Party, to the Communist Party, and now back to and intertwined again with the Progressive Party. Anyone that can read will see the uncanny resemblances between them. Nothing to changing a name and calling yourself something else. You still look the same.
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/in...
http://www.cpusa.org/faq/
And many of the progressive goals were laudable, while some were unrealistic, but it is the method of attaining those goals that is the problem. Frankly, their proposed pathway sounds more like fascism than anything.

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.

Glennville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I want a honest single soldier (Aug '15) Mar 19 LAURIE 4
Hinesville police officers harrasing the milita... Mar 3 Sherman 1
Who's in charge of corruption? (Apr '11) Mar 2 Sherman 3
Men Wearing Thongs (Sep '08) Mar 1 cutie pie 263
Children, Child Molesters Mar 1 cutie pie 4
Muslim Compound near Odum? (May '07) Feb '17 WLK 87
New Construction...New Mall...New Stores...in H... Feb '17 Mac 2

Glennville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Glennville Mortgages