Welcome to PatsFans.com

The New Progressive Movement

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Patters, Nov 13, 2011.

  1. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    The old arguments of the Reagan era folk are no longer an argument for a solution, but an argument for an approach that has already failed. Because of this, a new progressive movement is starting to emerge. What it will really look like is anyone's guess, but my guess is that even liberals like me will have shift in a libertarian way in order to accommodate this new thinking.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/opinion/sunday/the-new-progressive-movement.html?_r=1

    .... We are at the end of the 30-year Reagan era, a period that has culminated in soaring income for the top 1 percent and crushing unemployment or income stagnation for much of the rest....

    Thirty years ago, a newly elected Ronald Reagan made a fateful judgment: “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.”...

    Reagan’s was a fateful misdiagnosis. He completely overlooked the real issue — the rise of global competition in the information age — and fought a bogeyman, the government. Decades on, America pays the price of that misdiagnosis, with a nation singularly unprepared to face the global economic, energy and environmental challenges of our time.

    I'll summarize the rest rather than go over the sentence limit for patsfans.com: The editorial goes onto to say that a third progressive era will need to deal with deeply entrenched vested interests in order to revive public services, such as education and public investment; address the corruption on Wall Street; and reestablish the supremacy of voters over dollars. He sees the OWS, with its activities in more than 1,000 cities, as being the beginning of the path to renewal.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,884
    Likes Received:
    108
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -13

    When we see government spending and corporate cronyism expanding the power of government and restricting the power of the individual Reagan's observation:

    “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.”


    is more true than ever.


    The author is truly clueless, Reagan's intention was to defeat the USSR and reduce the size of government as a % of GDP to free up more resources for the private sector, this of course never happened. For the author to try to say that the Reagan concept has continued to this day is mind boggling in it's stupidity.
     
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    Ronald Reagan has been dead about 30 years, including many of those years when was brain dead scribbling in the White House at cabinet meetings. You can believe what you want about Reagan's intentions, but the reality is that even after the Cold War ended he kowtowed to the military industrial complex giving them budgets with which to build their pipe dreams, with little evidence that our world is safer today than it was before Reagan.

    He was famous for simple, stupid solutions, like the one that's so often quoted. Even in Libertarian solutions, government is part of the solution because it has a role to play in all walks of life, from our currency to our military to our courts to our highways to our human rights.

    There is no evidence that reducing the size of government improves the economy. That was tried in the Coolidge-Hoover days and that worked out well only for the wealthy. In a few small countries like Switzerland you find some support for the theory, but you also find support for democratic socialism in even more small countries, like those in Scandinavia. Reducing the size of government simply increases the power of the oligarchs, nothing else. That's why the oligarchs want government reduced. The proper solution is to have an open, transparent government that answers to votes, not to Wall Street and their minions.

    The reality is that Reaganism has failed just like Coolidgeism did; they both led ultimately to massive recessions/depressions, and levels of economic inequity that surely would make Christ turn in His grave if He were dead.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,884
    Likes Received:
    108
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -13

    Government is much larger as a % of GDP that it was during the 80's/90's, especially when one includes state and local government in the equation. This is killing the economy and working people, as well as creating more unemployed.
     
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,884
    Likes Received:
    108
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -13

    Speaking of corporate cronyism:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/12/b...-cornucopia-of-help-for-renewable-energy.html



    These artificially high energy cost are of course a very regressive tax on the poor.
     
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    There's no evidence of that. Much of our GDP has historically come from government. The reality is that taxpayer dollars, except for that used to pay debt, goes back into the economy and effects ever level of business. For instance, without food stamps, chances are thousands of small businesses would close. I agree we need to pay down the debt (through tax hikes, preferably) because our debt payments create more jobs overseas than they create here. But, why do you believe that smaller government leads to more jobs? As is, the reality is that technology is taking away a lot of unskilled jobs (the Globe recently ran an article pointing out that self-service gas stations and supermarkets are resulting in fewer minimum wage jobs) and foreign trade agreements are taking away other jobs. The fact is that although the 1% have been doing extremely well over the last four or so years, they are not creating many jobs.
     
  7. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Ignoring the fact that it is completely untrue, what a reprehensible thing to say. :mad: Not that I would expect anything less from the hate filled, intolerant left. :mad:

    I hope you never have someone close to you suffer from that horrible disease and that you never realize just how much you lodged your foot in your mouth with such a hateful statement.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    Your post makes no sense because you believe that Reagan did not have Alzheimer's, in which case calling him brain dead refers to his intellect, not to his brain function. So, what are you objecting to? Can you clarify that?

    On the other hand, if indeed Reagan did have Alzheimer's, do you think he should have stayed on as president? He and his minions put our nation at risk with his selfishness. To ignore the possibility that we had a CiC who was suffering from Alzheimer's is not a form of sympathy, it's a form of reckless irresponsibility, in my opinion.

    (And FYI, a great aunt of mine who I knew well died of Alzheimer's disease, and my family was there to care for her, so the pompous holier than thou mentality of some those wealth-worshippers on the right does not ring true to me.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  9. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Not only are you looking back with 20/20 hindsight, but you're also employing revisionist history. So I guess that means your hindsight more blind than 20/20. Reagan was not diagnosed with Alzheimer's until after he left office. You'll have to forgive me if I take the word of the official White House doctors over your angry, hateful, partisan attacks.

    While Known for Being Forgetful, Reagan Was Mentally Sound in Office, Doctors Say - NYTimes.com

    "''There was never anything that would raise a question about his ability to function as President,'' said Dr. Lawrence C. Mohr, one of Mr. Reagan's physicians in his second term. ''Ronald Reagan's cognitive function, belief structure, judgment, ability to choose between options, behavior and ability to communicate were totally and completely intact.

    The doctors said they had taken the unusual step of discussing their former patient's medical history publicly because neither they nor Mr. Reagan had covered up any illness, and because they did not want history to see them as having done so.

    While the doctors said they were familiar with Alzheimer's, none is an expert in it. But an Alzheimer's specialist -- after reviewing videotapes of news conferences and major events late in Mr. Reagan's Presidency, as well as the doctors' descriptions -- said he, too, saw no evidence that Mr. Reagan had the disease as President.
    '
    Then it's surprising that you have such a callous and hateful attitude towards another individual who suffered from that disease. Actually, given what I know about you, it's not surprising one bit. When the target is a republican, there's no low you won't sink to.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    Your compassion for those who suffer from illness rings false, I'm sorry to say, but perhaps that's because you make so many mean-spirited comments in this forum. That said, I'm glad that you believe Reagan did not have early Alzheimer's while in the White House, in which case my claim that he was brain dead should not be offensive to you, anymore than claims that Obama is helpless without a teleprompter is offensive to me.
     
  11. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Great analogy Patters. Attacking a man for suffering from one of the worst diseases imaginable versus attacking a man for using a teleprompter. Yeah those are the same. :rolleyes:

    Like I said: There's clearly no low you won't sink to when the target is a republican. I'm sure you're feeling very macho and proud of yourself right now.
     
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    I thought you said Reagan didn't have Alzheimer's in the White House? Make up your mind already!

    Reagan was brain dead when he was governor of CA and said that trees cause more pollution than cars or joked that the 17 million Americans who went to bed hungry every night were probably all on a diet. He was a stupid man. If you want to see my comment as poking fun at his ultimate Alzheimer's that's coming from you, but I have long held that Reagan was always a stupid man.

    "Because Vietnam was not a declared war, the veterans are not even eligible for the G. I. Bill of Rights with respect to education or anything."
    --Ronald Reagan, in Newsweek, April 21, 1980.

    "...a faceless mass, waiting for handouts."
    --Ronald Reagan, 1965. (Description of Medicaid recipients.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  13. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Like I said: There's clearly no low you won't sink to when the target is a republican. I'm sure you're feeling very macho and proud of yourself right now.
     
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    I'm glad you're using macho as a negative. There's hope for you Wolfie!
     
  15. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Perhaps it has always had a somewhat negative connotation in my mind, for some reason.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  16. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,093
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +270 / 11 / -11

    Where's you're patriotism? They did a recruitment ad for the US Navy, which let them film on the USS Reasoner. I can't find the original ad, but this is pretty close. ;)

    In the Navy - YouTube
     
  17. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Wow. This thread is wierd...and funny.
     
  18. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    It's odd to me how the term Progressive, and the Progressive movement is an aim to have less freedom and more government mandated actions involving ones life. That's such a bad use of that term.
     
  19. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,676
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +389 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    You forgot to incluce "Roosevelt-ism"...which is failing miserably to this day.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>