0 votes

Rhino: I love progressives

If you haven’t heard Beck lately, he is on a rant about progressives. He basically says that progressives want to slaughter their opponents. He gives no qualifiers such as progressives elected to office, or progressive leaders, or progressives like Mao, he just refers to the collective “progressives”.

The “True” tea party movement and the real grassroots progressive movement are friends and have more political ideology in common than different.

We both want people to succeed.

We both believe that corporations run the government.

We both believe in peace.

We both want to end the FED.

We both believe that some individuals need help and a hand.

We both believe in welfare.

We both believe in a safety net.

Granted, progressives believe that the only way to achieve some of these goals is through government and we believe that the only way to achieve these goals is through the market, but we have the end game in common; Prosperity and happiness for all or almost all.


And don’t ever assume that your average civilian progressive is the same as a progressive that has been elected to federal office.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Progressives Libertarian Summit

Its time for a national summit between libertarians and progressives...

In my opinion...

in peace & liberty,

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

I agree.

When and where?

Jane Hamsher must have read this post ...

over the weekend.


Well said, Rhino.

People must not listen to Beck and his bashing of progressives. He is, once again, trying to divide the people by painting others who we may have some in common with. We have a lot in common with progressives and we must work together to end unconstitutional wars, end the Fed, end the war on drugs, and restore personal liberties.

we both beleive in welfare?

we both beleive in welfare? please define that one rhino.. Welfare is what has killed this country.

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

Of course ...

by definition, welfare refers to government aid, but I was referring to charity with respect to true believers in markets.

The government has squeezed out the private safety nets for the most part.

I apologize for the misuse of the word.

Hillary Clinton proudly calls

Hillary Clinton proudly calls herself a "progressive"
That says it all....

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

And so does one of my best friends ...

whom I respect greatly.

Are we to take the same collective approach that Beck does?

rhino: hello

"And don’t ever assume that your average civilian progressive is the same as a progressive that has been elected to federal office."

Yet, the average civilian progressives are the ones electing the bad ones to federal office. Therefore, in my assessment, they are part of the problem.

If somebody is a progressive and a nonvoter, then maybe yes you have a point.

And what have we been voting for for the past 2 decades.

Yes, I voted for Harry Browne, but I have voted for the lesser of two evils on local and congressional races many times.

Explain again, what are you saying?

Is voting for a war loving neo-con better than voting for a socialist loving progressive?

rhino: response

I don't really know what I was saying at the moment. I just wanted to have a snappy reply because it tickles me to write rhino: in the subject line, so I felt like replying.

I think what I was saying is that if people vote in anybody who creates bad policies, then the people who voted them in are part of the problem. In my mind, the warfarism is definitely a larger issue to tackle. The welfare will bankrupt us and cause negative consequences, but the endless warfare will bankrupt us while making us look like arrogant jackasses to the rest of the world (and will overextend the military to where it cant defend effectively).

If someone elects a person who supports blatantly unconstitutional acts at the federal level, then they are part of the problem because they haven't been educated as to the purpose of a constitutional republican form of government. By consenting to the idea that the constitution is meaningless and can be interpreted out of existence, they are giving up the whole principle. At the end of the day, they may claim to be against the wars, but their lack of respect for the constitution helps the warmongers in their goals.

A lot of socialists and progressives claim to be against the wars, but they haven't made any progress. They are more concerned about compromise, turning a blind eye to the wars in order to pass "progressive" legislation.

At the local level it is completely different and it makes a lot more sense to vote for lesser of two evils, because you are usually voting on a specific issue. Even if you vote in a person with ridiculous beliefs at the local level, their authority will be limited such that the majority of their beliefs don't matter.

I have more thoughts but nobody is going to read this so i am stopping here.

I cannot disagree with any of that.

Having said that ...

If you simply don't vote in a system where voting matters, are you being principled or niave?

I don't think I am being

I don't think I am being either. I think I am just spending my time enjoying myself rather than wasting time on something which clearly does not matter. I registered and stood in line so that I could vote for the only person qualified to be president during the primaries, and the rest of the country proceeded to mock me by nominating mccain. By the time the general election rolled around, I had already realized the whole voting thing was just a big sham to trick americans into thinking they have a real choice.

In my assessment, the people being naive are the liberals and progressives who believe slogans such as "we are the government" or the always-classic "government of, by, and for the people." These people believe that yes we can have things like the federal reserve and the CIA which appear to do evil things and we don't understand anything about them, as long as we have "good guys" running them.

Or they believe that you can have legislation written by insurance lobbyists, and that as long as it is referred to as "health care reform" and your favorite politicians pay lipservice to it, then it must be a good thing. Even if nobody understands it or has even read the thing.

If you guys actually prove me wrong and medina, schiff, rand paul, kokesh, and all of your other favorite candidates all win and they rescue the country by teaching everybody the truth and slaying the leviathan, then I will change my mind. Until that happens (which sadly, I don't think it will), i see no reason to believe that voting matters and i will continue to entertain myself in other ways on election day.

sign the pledge Rhino!

Please spread the word about the Articles of Freedom.
We will put the Government in check! Join the Delegates a
nd a "goodly number of millions" of Americans in signing
the Pledge http://www.articlesoffreedom.us/Pledge.aspx

Freedom is NOT free!

Rhino, I think it comes down to definitions

I've been watching Beck and I've noticed that he has never given a specific definition for what a progressive is. He's playing kinda fast and loose with the term.

you watch him more than I do,

you watch him more than I do, buy my take is that while he is accurately calling the progressives that screwed us in the early 20th century "progressives", he is trying to make those progressives synonymous with the modern version. I believe this even in spite of his half-hearted protestations that there are progressives in both parties.

Ventura 2012

Its true. We want many the

Its true. We want many the same things they want, we just have different tactics. Of course, the neo-cons do NOT want what we want and are pure evil.

Ventura 2012

Rhino, you need to read more history

Progressiveness come out of the naturalism/evolution/humanist/theosophy wave that came through writings of Lyle/Darwin/Blavatsky which was passed onto Wilson/Hitler/Marx/Engels and all of Europe for WW1 & WW2. it is a very dangerous philosophy that leads to Godlessness, Dictatorships, and mass genocide. Progressiveness and our Constitution are opposed to the extreme & are polar opposites. our founders understood this and warned against it...
Thomas Paine:
“ It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.”
“ The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter, and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal.” “The Existence of God--1810”


2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

The politicians are another matter.

The rank and file progressive, I defined adequately above.

Not the same kind of Progressives

History has changes their platform. Southern Progressives, for example, wouldn't come close to your definition. Then again, the south is way different.

reedr3v's picture

Nice points, not often enough



I find much in common also

and somewhat refreshing to interact with the Progs sometimes... especially after battling the neocon WALL for so long! Ron Paul forms and encourages alliances/coalitions on the left ...on the issues that can be agreed upon..and I have called for this effort many times..especially on anti- war and end the fed..my two most passionate issues! We have work to do on BOTH sides/paradigms.

"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd

The freedom breeding grounds can be found in ...

local progressive blogs.

They think.

They seek knowledge.

They exist.

Therefore ...

they are easy targets.

The hard targets are the ones that we must first convince to exist ... to think ... to be human.

Hard Targets

Well, even in Germany there was a time when it had to be recognized that some could not be reached with truth or reason. Milton Meyer "They Thought They Were Free"

"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd

i do not

believe in welfare or safety nets, unless contributions are voluntary.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

Then we are in agreement.

Did you read it?


not thoroughly.
i stand corrected.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

God Bless.

Your journey will be a success.

Prove me wrong, and you will be deemed worthless.

Nice post.

Nice post.