tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post4454157619891445148..comments2024-03-18T17:42:24.279-04:00Comments on Dave Dubya's Freedom Rants: A "Good Man"Dave Dubyahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comBlogger198125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-16082460761130473122013-07-08T08:35:13.732-04:002013-07-08T08:35:13.732-04:00Well the silence on that is deafening. You know t...Well the silence on that is deafening. You know the Progressive movement -at least on this blog- is so tied in knots when they have to defend Alex Jones and denounce Howard Dean.free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-9706201186836968472013-06-26T14:16:37.266-04:002013-06-26T14:16:37.266-04:00Free0352: "[George W. Bush] spent and worse b...<b>Free0352</b>: "<i>[George W. Bush] spent and worse borrowed like a drunken sailor, and all the Conservatives went with him. Well except a handful, who are leading the Libertarian charge today.</i>"<br /><br />Yes, <i>all</i> the conservatives did go with him, just as they did with Ronald Reagan. That's why, under recent Republican presidents, deficits always increase and, hence, so does the federal debt. We're <i>still</i> paying the price.<br /><br /><br />"<i>Looks to me the Progressives left you behind a long time ago when it comes to civil liberties.</i>"<br /><br />That's because, as I've claimed all along, you can't see past your nose. I've said it enough but it clearly doesn't sink in: being a Democrat doesn't make one a "progressive". True progressives, which I'll agree can rarely be found in public office anymore, are totally and unabashedly against the modern surveillance-state (along with the corporate-state, the police-state, and the permanent war-state, which is by no means a coincidence -- it's all tied together). Those few that <i>I do consider</i> within this mold are Bernie Sanders (already mentioned) and Alan Grayson.<br /><br /><br />"<i>...they sold you out. Its not that they aren't progressive, its that you're not.</i>"<br /><br />Yes, the Democrats <i>have</i> sold me out -- along with selling out millions of <i>other</i> progressives in the country. They've migrated to the side of greed, thievery, lies and deceit. They're <i>just like</i> their Republican colleagues now. But one thing is a certainty -- <i>they're not</i> progressives. But I am! As I've mentioned to you more times than I care to recall -- they're all corporatists and tools of the elite and multinationals -- just like you!Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-50031852196113941802013-06-26T11:02:09.215-04:002013-06-26T11:02:09.215-04:00The problem with your wiki and Conyers page is the...The problem with your wiki and Conyers page is they don’t agree with the congressional district map I linked to. Did you check the map?<br /><br />Why does Dingell’s name, and not Conyers’, show up when I Google “Dearborn congressional district” or “Dearborn congressman”?<br /><br />Why does Dingell, and not Conyers, have a <a href="http://dingell.house.gov/our-district" rel="nofollow"> Dearborn office</a> ?<br /><br />Why does someone not from Detroit have to correct a person who is? <br /><br />Why is it, no matter how wrong you are, you stubbornly resist the truth? <br />Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-41442876563558050152013-06-25T23:31:46.861-04:002013-06-25T23:31:46.861-04:00Maybe you should check your sources before you run...Maybe you should check your sources before you run your mouth? You'll look a lot less of a clown when you do that. Schools out. Your welcome. That will conclude our political science class for the day.free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-14343905906740081422013-06-25T23:29:52.721-04:002013-06-25T23:29:52.721-04:00In fact, here is a link from Conyer's website ...In fact, here is a link from Conyer's website that shows all the precincts in his district. Please for the crowd, tell us what <a href="http://conyers.house.gov/index.cfm/district-information" rel="nofollow">the second one on the list is?</a><br /><br />Guy, I'm from fucking right next door in Hamtramck, I know my own fuck'n neighborhood I grew up in. I thought you knew Detroit? Which is it? Were you dancing the rain dance on the reservation or are your from The D? Not too many indian casinos' in the metro area.<br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-90140991511089967962013-06-25T23:11:57.065-04:002013-06-25T23:11:57.065-04:00Wrong about what? Conyers is the Congressman for ...Wrong about what? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Conyers" rel="nofollow">Conyers is the Congressman for Dearborne.</a><br /><br /><i>John James Conyers, Jr. (born May 16, 1929) is the U.S. Representative for Michigan's 13th congressional district,[2] serving in Congress since 1965 (the district was numbered as the 1st District until 1993, and as the 14th district from 1993 to 2013). The district includes the western half of Detroit, as well as <b>Dearborn</b>, Highland Park and most of the downriver suburbs. He is a member of the Democratic Party. He is currently the second longest-serving incumbent member of the House (after fellow Michigan Democrat, John Dingell) and the second-longest incumbent member of the entire Congress by length of service (also after Dingell).</i><br /><br />Dingell has Dearborn Heights. Conyers has Dearborne proper since the redistricting.<br /><br />Check your facts.<br /><br />As for the population of the Dearborn, its racial demographic <a href="javascript:void(0);" rel="nofollow">is famous.</a><br /><br /><i>According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the city with the largest percentage of Arab Americans is Dearborn, Michigan, a southwestern suburb of Detroit, at nearly 40%. The Detroit metropolitan area is home to the largest concentration of Arab Americans (403,445), followed by the New York City Combined Statistical Area (371,233), Los Angeles (308,295), Chicago (176,208), and the Washington D.C area. (168,208).[3]</i><br /><br />I highly doubt Conyers is going to ignore 403,445 votes. Especially in a district that loses population on other demographics every year.<br /><br />As for Conyer's wife being a criminal, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/10/monica-conyers-wife-to-jo_n_494305.html" rel="nofollow">her history in crime is well documented.</a><br /><br />So there's your ONE TRUE PROGRESSIVE. He's laying in bed every night with convicted corruption. I'm <i>suuuuuure</i> he knew nothing of the bribes. Yup, your one true progressive has had so many ethics violations its fucking unfathomable how he is still in office. Oh wait, yes it is. He's the anti-Israel pro Muslim vote on the hill. I guess those 403,445 Muslim votes count for something. Especially in Detroit, where voters vote early and often.free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-70558445179810417032013-06-25T19:25:19.510-04:002013-06-25T19:25:19.510-04:00Given your track record of inaccuracy of your clai...<br /><br />Given your track record of inaccuracy of your claims, I had to check. <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/MI" rel="nofollow">Conyers’ district</a> <br /><br />You’re wrong.... again<br />Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-45314668353970427692013-06-25T18:54:10.433-04:002013-06-25T18:54:10.433-04:00Still can’t get it through your skull there are pr...<i>Still can’t get it through your skull there are progressive civil libertarians, we see</i> <br /><br />All two of you. Wow. I'm impressed.<br /><br /><i>Even though we know where you pulled that number from, thanks to invading Iraq, drones, and blind obedience to the Israeli Right, that percentage can only grow</i><br /><br />Okay, lets say its .01%. We still have to kill them, because there really isn't any common ground to negotiate. You're right, I have a blind obedience to killing our sworn enemies who are trying to kill us first. My question is why don't you? After all, progressives are on my side of this argument. Obama even has a kill list.<br /><br /><i>Conyers also objected to your war of choice in Iraq in addition to the surveillance. So that makes him “not progressive” then, right?</i><br /><br />Oh get real. Its obvious that a huge majority of Conyers' (D - Dearbornistan) constituents are Arab and Muslim. Dearborn has more Arabs living in it than Saudi Arabia. That is not an exaggeration BTW, that part of Wayne county is the largest Muslim community outside of the middle east. So since they are obviously the primary target of the Surveillance State, his voters will crucify him were he to vote with the fellow Progressives. Conyers' support has nothing to do with libertarianism and everything to do with political survival. He's on the right side of the issue, for the wrong reasons. He's a corrupt old letch anyway. His wife just got out of prison for her corruption charges. Conyers is one of the dirtiest members of government anywhere. But I'm still glad he introduced his bill.<br /><br />So aside from the Congressman from Derka Derka land, what Progressives in government do you have left?<br /><br />Not many. And pretty soon its going to just be you and Jeff here. They are abandoning you to support Obama. Get over it. It happened to the Conservatives too a few years ago under Bush. The question is, do you boys have the integrity to man up and leave <i>them</i>?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-73868792998167286622013-06-25T16:25:00.931-04:002013-06-25T16:25:00.931-04:00Still can’t get it through your skull there are pr...Still can’t get it through your skull there are progressive civil libertarians, we see.<br /><br />Same old same old. No information, just opinion from you. At least I bothered to give a thoughtful account of why both progressives and conservatives fall in line. You add nothing to the discussion.<br /><br /><i>1 billion Muslims on this planet and about 20% of them want to kill every American</i><br /><br />Even though we know where you pulled that number from, thanks to invading Iraq, drones, and blind obedience to the Israeli Right, that percentage can only grow. Your neocons are the ones to thank for all of that. <br /><br />“Changed the subject”? Oh, you mean that two sides of the same coin thing? Well, then, that’s NOT changing the subject. Or was it my statement on human nature, power and exploiting fear?<br /><br />Conyers also objected to your war of choice in Iraq in addition to the surveillance. So that makes him “not progressive” then, right?<br /><br />Reality is so much easier when you can bend it to one’s individual definitions. That’s how you must operate. But it is entertaining. <br />Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-21339014547266919032013-06-25T15:25:14.713-04:002013-06-25T15:25:14.713-04:00Jeff,
Fiscal conservatism isn't a club you jo...Jeff,<br /><br />Fiscal conservatism isn't a club you join its being frugal with money. You can be a liberal democrat and have a wise spending plan. So by that standard, nope, George Bush was not a fiscal conservative. He was a major ginormous GOP Conservative. And those guys lost all credibility for being fiscal conservatives during GWB's 8 years in. He spent and worse borrowed like a drunken sailor, and all the Conservatives went with him. Well except a handful, who are leading the Libertarian charge today.<br /><br /><i>That's exactly what I'm saying.</i><br /><br />Damn your little movement is shrinking by the minute. Whose left? Conyers? Al'Queda's rep on the hill because he represents Dearbornistan? Give me a break. Looks to me the Progressives left you behind a long time ago when it comes to civil liberties. Wave goodbye, they sold you out. Its not that they aren't progressive, its that you're not.<br /><br />Dave,<br /><br />Bottom line, there are 1 billion Muslims on this planet and about 20% of them want to kill every American. That's just a fact. So yup, I disagree with the Libertarian notion if we just play nice they'll leave us alone. Protecting civil liberties is precisely the reason I want to kill them first, so we don't need these Constitution crushing programs to protect this country.<br /><br />But that doesn't change the fact that Progressives have sided <i>with me on this issue.</i> Sorry guy, they're supporting drone strikes and hell, they're going well beyond my willingness to combat terrorism by bugging every American. But its cute how you'll try to change the subject to a totally unrelated issue when you don't have a leg to stand on. Here's the deal, liberal Democrats and many progressive Democrats have had half a decade, half of which they had a super majority, to turn off the domestic spying.<br /><br />Instead they grew it. But no really, tell me again how Howard Dean and Al Franken and everybody else <i>isn't really</i> a progressive.<br /><br />Seems to me the only two people on Earth that meet your criteria are you and Jeff here. Oh and John Conyers, and the only reason he's supporting the Libertarian position is he has to because of his district being the Surveillance State's prime targets. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-57311928106134215092013-06-25T13:04:12.693-04:002013-06-25T13:04:12.693-04:00the reason our rights and civil liberties have bee...<i>the reason our rights and civil liberties have been continually trashed, and in an accelerating manner, is because the corporate-state has taken hold.</i><br /><br />Exactly. If they CAN do it, they WILL do it. Same thing as war.<br /><br />In fact, invading Iraq was just the other side of the coin of the corporatist neocon response to the opportunity provided by terrorist actions. Free bought that part hook, line and sinker, yet is outraged at the other side of the same coin perpetrated by his same masters.<br /><br />Let's try get back to earth for a second. Warrantless surveillance is not part of the progressive agenda. It is not even a part of a conservative agenda. It is an institutionalized response by power to an opportunity. The fact it is supported by both democrats and republicans, and most people, is due to human nature. Fear is the easiest emotion to generate and to manipulate. This is why people agreed to invade Iraq. Bush told us Saddam had connections to, and was training, al-Qaeda. Not to mention those "biological labs" and "nukular" aluminum tubes.<br /><br />What Free can't get through his skull is the fact there are progressive civil libertarians. He thinks only Right Wing libertarians care for civil liberties. But then, we know he buys into half the program anyway. As I've noted before, he only sees half the problem. He's incapable of understanding corporate power and manipulation of government applied contrary to the public good. ONLY government is the villain to him...Except when there's a "good war" to be had, which is all the time. Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-25017807698014186052013-06-25T12:40:45.125-04:002013-06-25T12:40:45.125-04:00Free0352: "So what you're saying here Jef...<b>Free0352</b>: "<i>So what you're saying here Jeff, is you can live with trashing human rights and civil liberties so long as the folks doing the trashing aren't nice to corporations?</i>"<br /><br />No, what I'm saying is the reason our rights and civil liberties have been continually trashed, and in an accelerating manner, is because the corporate-state has taken hold. Our government has already been hijacked by the elite and corporate interests, and like the marionette having its strings pulled by the manipulator up above, our government's largest foreign and domestic policies are dictated by those who are unelected and mostly unseen.<br /><br /><br />"<i>So you're going to tell me, that Howard Dean isn't a real progressive.</i>"<br /><br />That's <i>exactly</i> what I'm saying.<br /><br /><br />"<i>That's as credible as me saying Ron Paul isn't a real Libertarian or George Bush isn't a real Conservative.</i>"<br /><br />Since you're the one contrasting the differences between Dean and Paul, I'm not inclined to agree with it. As far as Bush, that's right -- he <i>isn't</i> a conservative. He's a neoconservative. There's a huge difference. You've made this point yourself, a few different times, on this very blog. Are you changing your stance, now, because it's more convenient? Or is your memory <i>really</i> that bad?<br /><br />I'm tellin' ya', they fucked you when they exposed you to all of that DU. You're a dead man walking. You know that, don't you?Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-70751993372727602042013-06-25T11:05:15.762-04:002013-06-25T11:05:15.762-04:00What I am saying is all you do is talk. You don&#...What I am saying is all you do is talk. You don't do anything. The only way to do anything is work through the power structure. That is why progressives work with the democrats, and the only libertarians actually trying to do something work through the republicans. <br /><br />You are just standing on the street corner flapping your jaws.Jerry Critterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01870618647449723147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-84602886978349486932013-06-25T06:31:36.727-04:002013-06-25T06:31:36.727-04:00What's the "movement's actions"?...<i>What's the "movement's actions"? Are you describing the pro-corporate Democratic Party again?</i><br /><br />So you're going to tell me, that <a href="http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/howard-dean-supports-surveillance" rel="nofollow">Howard Dean</a> isn't a <i>real</i> progressive. That's as credible as me saying Ron Paul isn't a real Libertarian or George Bush isn't a <i>real</i> Conservative.<br /><br />Give me a break. With all these <i>former</i> progressives you'd have to wonder if there are any left outside this blog. Oh, and you'd better start telling these folks they aren't in the movement anymore, because they seem to think they're not only in it, but they're leaders of it. And you'd better talk this over with your fellow progressive rank and file, because they keep calling these folks like Dean and Franken leaders. Or maybe you might want to reevaluate what being a Progressive really means.<br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-2412309471614941562013-06-25T06:25:01.719-04:002013-06-25T06:25:01.719-04:00So why are you a libertarian? All they do is talk....<i>So why are you a libertarian? All they do is talk. They don't do anything.</i><br /><br />So what you're saying is I should compromise some very basic principles and jump on with either party that pretty much everyone here admits are a pack of scum bags.<br /><br />Yeah that doesn't make any sense Jerry.<br /><br /><i>You obviously miss the point. It's because they're not progressives...they're corporatists</i><br /><br />So what you're saying here Jeff, is you can live with trashing human rights and civil liberties so long as the folks doing the trashing aren't nice to corporations? <br /><br />Good luck with that. I promise rouge governments have historically been a lot more problematic to their own people than any company but whatever, I won't mess with your personal prejudice. The fact is no company has the power to arrest you, or shoot you. If you don't pay your phone bill tomorrow, T Mobile won't send the SWAT team to come get you. Try that with the IRS and note the difference between the two.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /><br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-15272549877652655672013-06-24T16:26:43.948-04:002013-06-24T16:26:43.948-04:00Free0352: "...if so many Progressives are not...<b>Free0352</b>: "<i>...if so many Progressives are not so progressive anymore when are you going to start asking yourself 'Is this for me?'</i>"<br /><br />You obviously miss the point. It's because they're <i>not</i> progressives...they're corporatists. When is this going to start sinking in for you? I'm not as much anti-Democrat as I'm anti-corporatist. That's the same reason I'm against half of the libertarian screed. I view that party as pro-corporatist; therefore, I'm against it, and want nothing to do with it.<br /><br /><br />"<i>I agree with Conservatives when it comes to national security.</i>"<br /><br />We've discussed this at length, many times, so you know my stance on this issue. That's why I view you as a tool.<br /><br /><br />"<i>But it would seem, Libertarians are more progressive than your progressives are.</i>"<br /><br />They're at least <i>as progressive</i> on most of the social issues. On economic issues, though, Libertarians are tools of the corporate-state. Like you! <i>That's</i> the single reason I'll never climb that horse. <br /><br /><br />"<i>As for what Progressivism is, it is what it does. I don't care what it says, I care what it does.</i>"<br /><br />I agree...but we haven't had progressive leadership for such a long time, that's probably why you're so confused about it. There are very few in Congress (and certainly not the tool that occupies the White House) who entertain progressive causes. Some of these are: (1) An amendment to the Constitution voiding corporate-personhood; (2) Universal Healthcare; (3) An end to permanent and ongoing war; (4) Slashing the Military-Surveillance Complex to a quarter of what it is today -- for starters; and (5) Universal Worker's Rights. <br /><br />There are only a handful of Democrats, in Congress, who agree with these points.<br /><br /><br />"<i>[Progressiveness] certainly isn't what you are telling me it means to you, judging by the movement's actions.</i>"<br /><br />What's the "movement's actions"? Are you describing the pro-corporate Democratic Party again? If you are, haven't we been down this road enough?Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-67350371597477465822013-06-24T15:28:20.356-04:002013-06-24T15:28:20.356-04:00Free says, "I don't care what it says, I ...Free says, "I don't care what it says, I care what it does."<br /><br />So why are you a libertarian? All they do is talk. They don't do anything. No one will elect enough of them to do anything. I think the Green Party has more power than libertarians.Jerry Critterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01870618647449723147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-54796546826111398272013-06-24T14:59:45.944-04:002013-06-24T14:59:45.944-04:00That's funny Jeff, because when you talk to Co...That's funny Jeff, because when you talk to Conservatives they say the same thing, and that the GOP has become Socialism Lite.<br /><br />I think it just shows the partisanship and not the facts. I mean really, if so many Progressives are not so progressive anymore when are you going to start asking yourself "Is this for me?"<br /><br />As for my stance on national security issues and the Libertarian Party's stance on those issues, we are not in agreement. I agree with Conservatives when it comes to national security. I take a lot of shit for this among Libertarians.<br /><br />But it would seem, Libertarians are more <i>progressive</i> than your progressives are.<br /><br />As for what Progressivism is, it is what it does. I don't care what it says, I care what it <i>does.</i><br /><br />And your elected officials are pro Surveillance State. And the ONE effort Dave could find that is against the surveillance state, is being driven by Libertarians.<br /><br />So I guess my point is, perhaps its you that doesn't know what Progressivism is. It certainly isn't what you are telling me it means to you, judging by the movement's actions.<br /><br /><br /><br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-18510868239094181542013-06-24T14:38:22.122-04:002013-06-24T14:38:22.122-04:00Free0352, like I've already said, being Democr...Free0352, like I've already said, being Democratic doesn't equate to being progressive. There are few progressives any longer. They <i>used to</i> comprise a fairly large part of the Democratic Party, but that's before you were crawling around in diapers. This no longer the case, and I know you're very aware of this. So please, stop the deflection and insincerity. It only makes you appear more disingenuous than you already are. <br /><br />The Democratic Party, today, is just a version of "Republican-Lite". Both major parties have been bought by banking and corporate interests. This, I would hope, you can agree upon. <br /><br />Your statement that "libertarians support none of these" when referring to Dave's statement that "both [Republicans and most Democrats] let [b]anks write legislation, let corporations write regulations and trade agreements, support the war on drugs, and support the military industrial complex", made me chuckle. You're probably the most ardent and passionate war-monger that I've come across in these kinds of forums. You <i>love</i> permanent war, and it shows. So, tell me, is that part of your mad dog streak of anti-libertarianism? <br /><br />Plus, your statement "Progressives support all of the above", had me rolling on the floor.<br /><br />It's obvious you <i>don't know</i> what a progressive is (and, honestly, now I'm starting to suspect whether you <i>even know</i> what libertarianism means). You've claimed to know <i>just about everything else</i> known to mankind. Why not this?Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-71286823833818339972013-06-24T13:40:47.912-04:002013-06-24T13:40:47.912-04:00All Republicans and most Democrats are corporatist...<i> All Republicans and most Democrats are corporatists feeding at the same trough. They both let Banks write legislation, let corporations write regulations and trade agreements, support the war on drugs, and support the military industrial complex.</i><br /><br />BTW Libertarians support none of these things, while Progressives support all of them... well except weed. They do like weed. But beyond weed and gay marriage, Progressives support all of the above.free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-52956909851719385462013-06-24T13:38:55.225-04:002013-06-24T13:38:55.225-04:00Next time you go looking for a progressive voice t...<i>Next time you go looking for a progressive voice to quote, try Bernie Sanders.</i><br /><br />... because if you can't cherry pick you can't be right. Progressives against the surveillance state are like Libertarians against abortion.<br /><br />Tiny minority that is totally inconsequential. <br /><br /><i>How about an example of Boehner, Cheney or Hastert booed at CPAC?</i><br /><br />Probably not one as Conservatives support the surveillance state (except when Obama is running it).<br /><br />I can admit that about Conservatives because I'm an honest person and I don't need to lie to myself as you folks do about Progressives.<br /><br /><br /><br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-73509103781112158392013-06-24T13:16:12.677-04:002013-06-24T13:16:12.677-04:00Nancy Pelosi booed , interrupted by liberal onlin...Nancy Pelosi <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_23520021/san-jose-nancy-pelosi-booed-interrupted-by-liberal?wpisrc=nl_fix" rel="nofollow"> booed</a> , interrupted by liberal online activists<br /><br />How about an example of Boehner, Cheney or Hastert booed at CPAC?Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-74765453268848468682013-06-24T11:33:54.270-04:002013-06-24T11:33:54.270-04:00Progressives are for this stuff. They are simply a...<i>Progressives are for this stuff. They are simply against a Republican being in charge of it... that's all.</i><br /><br />No, that's not all. As I have agreed, Democrats are for this stuff. They are simply against a Republican being in charge of it. And don't forget MOST Republicans are for it no matter who's in charge, although they have their share of "Only when our guy does it". <br /><br />Next time you go looking for a progressive voice to quote, try Bernie Sanders.<br /><br />In case you haven't figured it out yet, All Republicans and most Democrats are corporatists feeding at the same trough. They both let Banks write legislation, let corporations write regulations and trade agreements, support the war on drugs, and support the military industrial complex.<br /><br />Now, for a progressive viewpoint, read what Bernie Sanders and Noam Chomsky say about these issues.<br />Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-22741259619133989282013-06-24T04:47:19.019-04:002013-06-24T04:47:19.019-04:00Sure I'd blame all those who support the Ameri...Sure I'd blame all those who support the American left, just as I blame the Conservatives. You deserve to be blamed. At least many Conservatives at this stage are sorry.<br /><br />Here's Howard Dean speaking to the Netroots just 15 hours ago.<br /><br /><i>“I think the American people are willing to give up some privacy in exchange for safety</i>"<br /><br />But by all means, tell me how Howard Dean really isn't a Progressive. No, he is. And like most progressives, he's cool with the surveillance state, so long as it's a Democrat running it. Here's Dean on meet the press-<br /><br /><i>From a Democratic point of view, put yourself, as a Democrat, in the position of George Bush running all this stuff and Dick Cheney — that would make me nervous.</i><br /><br />So get with the times guys. Progressives are for this stuff. They are simply against a Republican being in charge of it... that's all.<br /><br />free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-63221648056023824772013-06-24T04:20:30.611-04:002013-06-24T04:20:30.611-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.free0352https://www.blogger.com/profile/09930138880454672809noreply@blogger.com