Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5087 Mar 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
Here's some more facts demonstrating what hypocrites Right Wingers are - claiming they care so much - while they screw our veterans every chance they get.
Now, earlier your Right Wing buddies were unable to refute the obvious - but maybe you can, or just throw so e personal insults out there.
Whichever...
It's amazing it is possible for Right Wingers to be so wrong so often and remain so clueless.
Oh, those pesky facts:
Republicans Seek To Cut Benefits for Disabled Veterans
Republicans Seek To Cut Benefits for Disabled Veterans
"Remember Michele Bachmanns’s attempted $4 billion cut from disabled veterans compensation? Well, they're back. Except this time they are looking to cut away at our VA healthcare.
Republican Paul Ryan and the House of Representatives are looking to end VA healthcare benefits for disabled veterans.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 35, the cuts would leave 130,000 veterans with no healthcare alternative. This means veterans with conditions not recognized by the VA, like certain diseases from Agent Orange exposure, would have to pay for healthcare out of pocket if they had not other service connected disability".
Instead of merely increasing the co-pay or taxing Wall Street, Congress wants to just cut your benefits out, all together.
"The Republican budget would cut $11 billion from veterans spending, or 13 percent from what President Obama asked for to support our veterans.
But, this shortsightedness isn't new.
Back in 2005, President Bush underfunded the Department of Veterans Affairs by about a billion dollars, despite its need.
The result? Secretary Jim Nicholson was forced to crawl before Congress and plead with it to pass emergency supplemental spending, just so it could keep the doors open.
Would you PLEASE post the link to your information????? I'm not saying it's not true(although I wonder about your interpretation), but you libs have an aversion to posting your sources. President didn't LOVE our veterans until he was taught a lesson about his attitude. Don't remember that little tidbit, huh?
You know, you can go on and on about how correct you are(in your mind) about what is going on, but I can go out and take a look around and tell what is REALLY going on. This country is well on it's way down the tubes. It didn't start with Bush(regardless of what your warped interpretation of republicans is) and Obama is just carrying on the job that was started years ago. Just curious: How do you progressives want our country to be? What direction is this country heading in that excites you so much?

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5088 Mar 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
A little obsessed are we ?
Attacking me in response to a post by someone named Apparition ?
It's OK.
We Progressives have been carrying Right Wingers on our backs since Reagan, while the Right Wing parasites never stop whining whenever asked to contribute.
This is absolutely delusional. You progressives ARE the parasites.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5089 Mar 25, 2013
honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
I was talking about Jodi Arias! You are probably the only person in America that thinks shes innocent, unless that was sarcasm. As for Synergy, I like her and her views. I believe we are all entitled to our own beliefs.
Thank you, honestly.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5090 Mar 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
We better alert the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans association, and the other veterans organizations supporting the bill, that they are are just not smart enough to understand what they should support, and what they shouldn't.
So, we'll retrain our veterans to understand that:
When Bush underfunded Walter Reed and made wounded veterans live in squalor - with mold and rats, squalor is good;
When Right Wingers refuse to fund veterans programs at the levels the veterans and the Moderates and Progressives demand- that's shows how much Right Wingers love veterans;
When Democrats consistently vote at higher rates to fund veterans programs than Republicans - that's good for veterans
When the Right Wing House is gutting 11 Billion this year alone from veterans programs - that was good for veterans.
The neat thing about this debate is jts about money - not emotion.
Right Wingers love veterans -they'll say lots of fancy words with the flags waving in the background of the TV shots, just don't ask them to spend their money on them.
Talk is cheap - money - now that's something else.
Here is another INTERPRETATION. Want more?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5091 Mar 25, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is another INTERPRETATION. Want more?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/...
Good link, Synergy. There were other amendments that Republicans wanted to add to pay for the bill, but the Democrats wouldn't let them be voted on - Dems did not want Republicans to support the bill and thus take away their disingenuous finger pointing opportunity. They love to use people as props and pawns.
columbus native

Edmond, OK

#5092 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sentence fragments are not helpful in trying to understand your post. Are you actually saying our soldiers are "spoiled" and overpaid and fighting for selfish reasons? No wonder you voted for Obama.
You military whinners are the worst. Go fight a war for cheney bush and haliburton and want the rest of us to applaud!Many got their huge student loans discharged, got nice salaries with big bonuses and the taxpayer picks up your tab. Injured or killed? Why did you go and fight a senseless war and when the outcome is not pleasing you want everyone to feel soooo sorry for you.
columbus native

Edmond, OK

#5093 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Really, recent polls have Obama's approval ratings dropping steadily - 4 points since last month and 8 points since December to 47%. And when looking at just self identified Democrats and Independents, his numbers have dropped up to 10% depending on the poll. At the same time, the number of those identifying themselves as Republicans has increased, while those identifying themselves as Independents is at the lowest point since November. Maybe the public is finally waking up - just wish it had happened sooner.
Your ken and barbie romney pair would be a worst disaster then Obama. You want us to stop doing anything good for OUR country here in America and go blow our brains out all over the world foghting enemies that are dangerous to their own countries but not MINE. Get a life, get out of the military so you can think straight, go to a technical school learn a trade and start paying taxes instead of bleeding this great country with over-hyped military BS. You are no World War 11 or Korean war winners but exspensive losers who got caught up in the worst presidents evers deceitful crooked ways.
columbus native

Edmond, OK

#5094 Mar 25, 2013
CORE CORRUPTION wrote:
BOTH SHAMELESS AND ISICKSON VOTED FOR THE WALL STREET INVESTMENT BANK BAILOUT.
After bush and company took all regulations off Wallstreet there was a giant unregulated run on our banks and financial institutions by corrupt individuals who believe as corruptly as bush. The result is a massive bailout paid for by honest taxpayers or else this country and world would be in the worst depression ever to almost outdo bush the worst scumbag ever! Take regulations off the cattle raisers and you get lots of cattle feces to go along with your hamburger meat. It's ashame there has to be regulations but with human greed at it's highest level it unfortunetly is a necessity. In fact I question those who want to unregulate everything. Are they not aware that regulations(not over regulations) gurantee our safety on all levels from scame artists all around us!
domino

Americus, GA

#5095 Mar 25, 2013
columbus native wrote:
<quoted text>You military whinners are the worst. Go fight a war for cheney bush and haliburton and want the rest of us to applaud!Many got their huge student loans discharged, got nice salaries with big bonuses and the taxpayer picks up your tab. Injured or killed? Why did you go and fight a senseless war and when the outcome is not pleasing you want everyone to feel soooo sorry for you.
You could stop making statements on things you know nothing whatsoever about. Those "Military Loans" as you put it, are call GI Bills, which each individual pays in every pay period. If one does not serve their full enlisrment, then that is lost. As a matter of fact, unless its reinstated, Obama has taken that away too. And the soldiers, themselves, paid it in. ITS THEIRS!
Man in Plaid

Albertville, AL

#5096 Mar 25, 2013
We right-wingers complain when we "have to contribute" because we are the main contributors of tax dollars. At some point, the parasite-infested host realizes that if he doesn't get rid of the bloodsuckers, he won't sustain life much longer. And parasites, being parasites, couldn't care less.

It appears to me that the contribution of the progressives to the modern political landscape is the creation of a large and growing class of people who depend upon the government to support them in various ways. My favorite government dependent this time of year is the recipient of the six thousand dollar tax refund. How can someone who doesn't pay taxes draw such an enormous check at the taxpayers' expense? It makes me wonder if a person who persists in a non-productive lifestyle because he/she can depend upon the government to tax money taken from solvent workers to supplement his/her meagre income each year is the embodiment of a new kind of American Dream. This gives a new meaning to "full faith in the American government."

I wonder what Marx and Engels would say were they here to observe this new means of manipulating and robbing the working class voters. Perhaps they would see the creation of a dependent class as a way of splitting the proletariat, thus diminishing its political potential. This raises an important question: What are the Progressives progressing toward? If this split of the proletariat is any indicator, then it appears to be a progression toward oligarchy. Should not a Progressive see this as a problem? Should they not be disconcerted by the growth of a large group of voters who cast ballots for their cause out of economic dependence rather than informed decisions based upon critical thought? Is not this only a means of using the conditioned needs of many to ensure the power of the few? Is this progress or regress?

As a reader of history and classic literature, I cannot help but see the Progressives' recent use of those dependent on the government as a contemporary episode of a courtship with a fickle mob. When allegiance derives from handouts, the mob will turn to those with the deepest pockets and the most lucrative offer. Should the parasitic nature of entitlements-based politics reach its inevitable end, the failure of the American economy and currency, how will the Progressives fare with the monster hat they have created as a means to power?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5097 Mar 25, 2013
Man in Plaid wrote:
Should not a Progressive see this as a problem? Should they not be disconcerted by the growth of a large group of voters who cast ballots for their cause out of economic dependence rather than informed decisions based upon critical thought? Is not this only a means of using the conditioned needs of many to ensure the power of the few?
Thank you for such an outstanding post. The portion I quoted above to me is, regrettably, the crux of the matter. It is hard not to come to the conclusion that that is the goal of the Liberals. Create a permanent underclass that considers itself incapable of surviving without a paternalistic government to take care of them. This ensures that those same people will always vote for whomever promises the most handouts, rather than "hand ups." They will never rise above that and so will guarantee the perpetual power of those promising the handouts. What both groups (the Liberals and their dependents) will not recognize is that it is impossible to sustain an economic system that keeps taking more and more away from those who produce and contribute to this country in order to support those who WILL not (not CAN not) support themselves. And yet the people (top 5% income earners) who already pay more in taxes than the bottom 95% combined are called whiners and greedy for not wanting to pay even more taxes to support wasteful, duplicative programs. If we do not get a handle on the out of control spending in all areas, there will not be money for those who truly need help. And yet those on the Left think that those who make this country work will just sit back while more and more gets taken from them. Is anybody paying attention to what happened in Cyprus today, there are lessons to be learned there - or warnings to be heeded.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#5098 Mar 25, 2013
In the 1930's Communist were called Progressives as the word Communist drew a negative responses from the public. They knew what communist were and didn't like them, but the word Progressives was something new!
Call a Socialist liberal a Communist and they are ready to fight you. Call them a Progressive and they will tell you that is what they are. They are proud to be Progressives.
Are they so dumb and ignorant that they don't know that a Progressive is the same as a Communist?
I think they know, but just won't admit to themselves or others of what they really are. Kind of puzzling isn't it?
Either you are, or you are not. Which is it?

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#5099 Mar 25, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for such an outstanding post. The portion I quoted above to me is, regrettably, the crux of the matter. It is hard not to come to the conclusion that that is the goal of the Liberals. Create a permanent underclass that considers itself incapable of surviving without a paternalistic government to take care of them. This ensures that those same people will always vote for whomever promises the most handouts, rather than "hand ups." They will never rise above that and so will guarantee the perpetual power of those promising the handouts. What both groups (the Liberals and their dependents) will not recognize is that it is impossible to sustain an economic system that keeps taking more and more away from those who produce and contribute to this country in order to support those who WILL not (not CAN not) support themselves. And yet the people (top 5% income earners) who already pay more in taxes than the bottom 95% combined are called whiners and greedy for not wanting to pay even more taxes to support wasteful, duplicative programs. If we do not get a handle on the out of control spending in all areas, there will not be money for those who truly need help. And yet those on the Left think that those who make this country work will just sit back while more and more gets taken from them. Is anybody paying attention to what happened in Cyprus today, there are lessons to be learned there - or warnings to be heeded.
+1 well stated.

I've (attempted to) to say pretty much the same thing several times, you said it so much better...
truth

Sylacauga, AL

#5100 Mar 25, 2013
Down with obama
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#5101 Mar 25, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
We better alert the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans association, and the other veterans organizations supporting the bill, that they are are just not smart enough to understand what they should support, and what they shouldn't.
So, we'll retrain our veterans to understand that:
When Bush underfunded Walter Reed and made wounded veterans live in squalor - with mold and rats, squalor is good;
When Right Wingers refuse to fund veterans programs at the levels the veterans and the Moderates and Progressives demand- that's shows how much Right Wingers love veterans;
When Democrats consistently vote at higher rates to fund veterans programs than Republicans - that's good for veterans
When the Right Wing House is gutting 11 Billion this year alone from veterans programs - that was good for veterans.
The neat thing about this debate is jts about money - not emotion.
Right Wingers love veterans -they'll say lots of fancy words with the flags waving in the background of the TV shots, just don't ask them to spend their money on them.
Talk is cheap - money - now that's something else.
Boring.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#5102 Mar 25, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
In the 1930's Communist were called Progressives as the word Communist drew a negative responses from the public. They knew what communist were and didn't like them, but the word Progressives was something new!
Call a Socialist liberal a Communist and they are ready to fight you. Call them a Progressive and they will tell you that is what they are. They are proud to be Progressives.
Are they so dumb and ignorant that they don't know that a Progressive is the same as a Communist?
I think they know, but just won't admit to themselves or others of what they really are. Kind of puzzling isn't it?
Either you are, or you are not. Which is it?
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?

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5103 Mar 25, 2013
columbus native wrote:
<quoted text>Your ken and barbie romney pair would be a worst disaster then Obama. You want us to stop doing anything good for OUR country here in America and go blow our brains out all over the world foghting enemies that are dangerous to their own countries but not MINE. Get a life, get out of the military so you can think straight, go to a technical school learn a trade and start paying taxes instead of bleeding this great country with over-hyped military BS. You are no World War 11 or Korean war winners but exspensive losers who got caught up in the worst presidents evers deceitful crooked ways.
Your comments about the Romney's are something you'll NEVER know. We KNEW what Obama was up to and you uninformed voters STILL voted for him AGAIN. You have NO IDEA what kind of president Romney would have been, so you might as well move on. YOU voted for Obama, now YOU are going to pay the piper BIG TIME!!!! The trouble is, you are taking the rest of us down with you. Disgusting.
Progressives

Dawsonville, GA

#5104 Mar 25, 2013
One historian defined progressivism as the "political movement that addresses ideas, impulses, and issues stemming from modernization of American society. Emerging at the end of the nineteenth century, it established much of the tone of American politics throughout the first half of the century."

Historians debate the exact contours, but generally date the "Progressive Era" from the 1890s to either World War I or the onset of the Great Depression.

The Founders believed that all men are created equal and that they have certain inalienable rights. All are also obliged to obey the natural law, under which we have not only rights but duties. We are obliged "to respect those rights in others which we value in ourselves" (Jefferson). The main rights were thought to be life and liberty, including the liberty to organize one's own church, to associate at work or at home with whomever one pleases, and to use one's talents to acquire and keep property. For the Founders, then, there is a natural moral order -- rules discovered by human reason that promote human well-being, rules that can and should guide human life and politics.

The Progressives rejected these claims as naive and unhistorical. In their view, human beings are not born free. John Dewey, the most thoughtful of the Progressives, wrote that freedom is not "something that individuals have as a ready-made possession." It is "something to be achieved." In this view, freedom is not a gift of God or nature. It is a product of human making, a gift of the state. Man is a product of his own history, through which he collectively creates himself. He is a social construct. Since human beings are not naturally free, there can be no natural rights or natural law. Therefore, Dewey also writes, "Natural rights and natural liberties exist only in the kingdom of mythological social zoology."

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#5105 Mar 25, 2013
domino wrote:
<quoted text>
You could stop making statements on things you know nothing whatsoever about. Those "Military Loans" as you put it, are call GI Bills, which each individual pays in every pay period. If one does not serve their full enlisrment, then that is lost. As a matter of fact, unless its reinstated, Obama has taken that away too. And the soldiers, themselves, paid it in. ITS THEIRS!
You are TRYING to converse with a low information voter. It's frustrating, huh? He's uninformed just like the rest of his ilk.
Progressives

Dawsonville, GA

#5106 Mar 25, 2013
The Purpose of Government

For the Founders, thinking about government began with the recognition that what man is given by nature -- his capacity for reason and the moral law discovered by reason -- is, in the most important respect, more valuable than anything government can give him. Not that nature provides him with his needs. In fact, the Founders thought that civilization is indispensable for human well-being. Although government can be a threat to liberty, government is also necessary for the security of liberty. As Madison wrote, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." But since men are not angels, without government, human beings would live in "a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger." In the Founders' view, nature does give human beings the most valuable things: their bodies and minds. These are the basis of their talents, which they achieve by cultivating these natural gifts but which would be impossible without those gifts.

For the Founders, then, the individual's existence and freedom in this crucial respect are not a gift of government. They are a gift of God and nature. Government is therefore always and fundamentally in the service of the individual, not the other way around. The purpose of government, then, is to enforce the natural law for the members of the political community by securing the people's natural rights. It does so by preserving their lives and liberties against the violence of others. In the founding, the liberty to be secured by government is not freedom from necessity or poverty. It is freedom from the despotic and predatory domination of some human beings over others.

Government's main duty for the Founders is to secure that freedom -- at home through the making and enforcement of criminal and civil law, abroad through a strong national defense. The protection of life and liberty is achieved through vigorous prosecutions of crime against person and property or through civil suits for recovery of damages, these cases being decided by a jury of one's peers.

The Progressives regarded the Founders' scheme as defective because it took too benign a view of nature. As Dewey remarked, they thought that the individual was ready-made by nature. The Founders' supposed failure to recognize the crucial role of society led the Progressives to disparage the Founders' insistence on limited government. The Progressive goal of politics is freedom, now understood as freedom from the limits imposed by nature and necessity. They rejected the Founders' conception of freedom as useful for self-preservation for the sake of the individual pursuit of happiness. For the Progressives, freedom is redefined as the fulfillment of human capacities, which becomes the primary task of the state.

To this end, Dewey writes, "the state has the responsibility for creating institutions under which individuals can effectively realize the potentialities that are theirs." So although "it is true that social arrangements, laws, institutions are made for man, rather than that man is made for them," these laws and institutions "are not means for obtaining something for individuals, not even happiness. They are means of creating individuals. Individuality in a social and moral sense is something to be wrought out." "Creating individuals" versus "protecting individuals": this sums up the difference between the Founders' and the Progressives' conception of what government is for.

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.

Kingsland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Moreno October Surprise Announcement 7 min Bob 34
Beware Moreno 4 council dot com 30 min Nancy 3
morenoforcouncil.com 38 min Morondotcom 6
Another rethuglican politician arrested. Nothin... 58 min anon 4
The Big goverment Era comes to Kingsland 1 hr Leo 33
Cumberland Pizza And Games 3 hr Georgia Lady 11
Rec league football setting bad examples 23 hr pfam 4
Kingsland Dating
Find my Match

Kingsland Jobs

Kingsland People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Kingsland News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Kingsland

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]