Obama Salutes Marines With Cup

[-SpectraL]

I thought progressives were generally the ones trying to get rid of guns.

"Progressives" are the politically correct faggits.

[Jedi Moped]

War mongering progressives?

Honestly I didn't know there was such a group.

Yeah, they're the nationalistic faggits proudly waving their dumb flags and wooing all the military equipment and protocols. Brainless sheeple who couldn't think for themselves if their lives depended on it, which it does.

You Might Be a Progressive If ...
by
Michael Schwalbe

In the propaganda wars that surround elections, political labels often become detached from reality. The leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, Barack Obama, has been called a "leftist" by Republican flacks and a "progressive" by some of his supporters. Others see Obama as a moderate Democrat only slightly less friendly to corporate capital and to the military-industrial complex than the Republican John McCain. It would be no surprise, then, if many people were wondering, Just who is a progressive?

No one, of course, has the authority to decide who is a progressive and who isn't. Yet if the label "progressive" has meaning at all, it is only because of some shared criteria we have in mind when we use it. So it might be worthwhile to put these criteria on the table, not to draw boundaries and hand out membership badges, but to spark a conversation about the common ground of ideas and values on which progressives stand, and to underscore the point that the center is not the left.

    So who is a progressive?
You might be one if ...You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.
   
You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.
   
You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.
   
You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.
   
You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.
   
You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.
   
You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.
   
You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.
   
You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.
   
You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.
   
You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.
   
You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.
   
You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.
   
You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.
   
You think it's crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.
   
You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.
   
You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.
   
You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.
   
You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.
   
You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.
   
You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.
   
You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.
   
You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.
   
You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.

No doubt some readers will say this list is incomplete. It is. Many policy issues of importance to progressives go unmentioned. Others might say that the list leans too far to the left, or not far enough. It could also be said that some items are vague (what does it mean to say that human rights ought always to trump property rights?). These are all useful responses. If we hope to work together to transform the social world, we need to know what we agree on, what we don't agree on, and what needs further hashing-out.

In the end, however, it's not labels and identities and criteria for bestowing them that really matter. Political terms have consequences, but only because of how we use them. Which suggests another item for the list. You might be a progressive if you think that it's important to take seriously the meaning of political identities, but that what really matters is living out those identities in ways that help to create more peace, justice, and equality.

I thought progressives were generally the ones trying to get rid of guns.

"Progressives" are the politically correct faggits.

Did everyone but SpectraL notice how SpectraL doesn't know what a progressive is and refuses to be taught.

[Infinityshock]

At least they got rid of the nigger running the justice dept

[Cory]

War mongering progressives?

Honestly I didn't know there was such a group.

Someone can be left-wing and still have an aggressive foreign policy. Lyndon Johnson and FDR are two examples. The anti-war Left didn't really become a big deal until the 1960's. The irony is that before that the right was typically "isolationist" and anti-war while the left were the interventionists.

[xbcnfujv]

that shit was funny as fuck -- 'nah'm sayin' ?

[RustyShackleford]

This is funny because
a. Nothing gets a plebian dick harder than a uniform and the ritual that goes with it.
b. Because the leader of the plebs doesn't give a fuck about the traditions they cherish.

He's neither in the right nor in the wrong. It mostly just exposes hypocrisy and stupidity on both sides. Though in my opinion he should at least pay lip service to the men he uses as cannon fodder.

This wouldn't have happened if Netanyahu was our president.

[Jedi Moped]

War mongering progressives?

Honestly I didn't know there was such a group.

Someone can be left-wing and still have an aggressive foreign policy. Lyndon Johnson and FDR are two examples. The anti-war Left didn't really become a big deal until the 1960's. The irony is that before that the right was typically "isolationist" and anti-war while the left were the interventionists.

Thanks for the history lesson. Do you have anything that is relevant to now?

[Lanny]

This is funny because
a. Nothing gets a plebian dick harder than a uniform and the ritual that goes with it.
b. Because the leader of the plebs doesn't give a fuck about the traditions they cherish.

He's neither in the right nor in the wrong. It mostly just exposes hypocrisy and stupidity on both sides. Though in my opinion he should at least pay lip service to the men he uses as cannon fodder.

This wouldn't have happened if Netanyahu was our president.

The important part is that you feel superior to everyone.

[RustyShackleford]

This is funny because
a. Nothing gets a plebian dick harder than a uniform and the ritual that goes with it.
b. Because the leader of the plebs doesn't give a fuck about the traditions they cherish.

He's neither in the right nor in the wrong. It mostly just exposes hypocrisy and stupidity on both sides. Though in my opinion he should at least pay lip service to the men he uses as cannon fodder.

This wouldn't have happened if Netanyahu was our president.

The important part is that you feel superior to everyone.

No what is important is that I am.

[Lanny]

right m8


I WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT IM MAKING THE OK SIGN BY TOUCHING MY INDEX FINGER TO MY THUMB FORMING THE O SHAPE BUT I DONT KNOW THE MOST CONCISE WAY TO CONVEY THAT SO NOW IM TELLING YOU THATS METAPHORICALLY WHAT ID BE DOING IF WE WERE TALKING IN PERSON.

[Cory]

Thanks for the history lesson. Do you have anything that is relevant to now?

Someone asked if there could be such a thing as a "war mongering" Progressive. I answered the question in the affirmative. I don't see the issue.

But to point to something more modern, I think we might be seeing those old trends re-emerge. With the GOP trending over time to a more Libertarian stance on foreign policy (the influence of the neo-cons persists, but is waning) as the Democrats under Obama/Biden and Hillary are becoming more and more the interventionist party.

If the 2016 election is Rand Paul versus Hillary Clinton this development will crystallize and become more apparent.

[Juicebox]

Thanks for the history lesson. Do you have anything that is relevant to now?

Someone asked if there could be such a thing as a "war mongering" Progressive. I answered the question in the affirmative. I don't see the issue.

But to point to something more modern, I think we might be seeing those old trends re-emerge. With the GOP trending over time to a more Libertarian stance on foreign policy (the influence of the neo-cons persists, but is waning) as the Democrats under Obama/Biden and Hillary are becoming more and more the interventionist party.

If the 2016 election is Rand Paul versus Hillary Clinton this development will crystallize and become more apparent.

The only reason the GOP is taking that stance on foreign policy is because they know they've alienated everyone who supported them for any reason besides "Obama is a Muslim" and they're trying to get their voters back


And speaking of things that are about to crystallize, I gotta go...

[Ninja]

You got two types of people.  Those that love government and those who don't.  Those who love government just bitch and moan about how they think the government should be run properly.  Not, that it matters, because the government is fucking corrupt and it's all scripted BS.  But, they can't admit this to themselves, so they just argue with each other to somehow make it seem like it all has meaning and their team can win!  Mindless, Statist ball lickers.

I don't give a fuck if Obama salutes some military fags, because they're all enslaving me.  FUCK THEM ALL!

[Cory]

You got two types of people.  Those that love government and those who don't.  Those who love government just bitch and moan about how they think the government should be run properly.  Not, that it matters, because the government is fucking corrupt and it's all scripted BS.  But, they can't admit this to themselves, so they just argue with each other to somehow make it seem like it all has meaning and their team can win!  Mindless, Statist ball lickers.

I don't give a fuck if Obama salutes some military fags, because they're all enslaving me.  FUCK THEM ALL!

If only reality was so simple. Whatever it takes to keep you going I guess.

[Soso0]

You got two types of people.  Those that love government and those who don't.  Those who love government just bitch and moan about how they think the government should be run properly.  Not, that it matters, because the government is fucking corrupt and it's all scripted BS.  But, they can't admit this to themselves, so they just argue with each other to somehow make it seem like it all has meaning and their team can win!  Mindless, Statist ball lickers.

I don't give a fuck if Obama salutes some military fags, because they're all enslaving me.  FUCK THEM ALL!

If only reality was so simple. Whatever it takes to keep you going I guess.

Reality IS that simple.