I remember when liberal or progressive meant you weren't for

[mmonk]

small ineffective government nor favoring dismantling New Deal policies and regulations for the private sector or substituting the private sector for the public sector.

[fascisthunter]

1. it still is

[gratuitous]

2. Liberals and progressives used to be against torture and illegal wars

But in trying to get with this year's fashion (not to mention 84% of liberal Democrats), I'm trying very hard to reach accommodation with execution by drone, indefinite detention, and a bunch of other formerly repressive activities. It's not been easy, and I find myself constantly backsliding, getting hung up on that goddam piece of paper.

[mmonk]

18. LOL

[DCBob]

3. I remember when liberal or progressive meant supporting the Democratic party.

guess Im just old fashioned that way.

[msongs]

4. old fashioned was when elected dems supported the democratic party and platform nt

[Blue_In_AK]

5. I thought it was the other way around. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. I remember when Democrats were liberals.

[DCBob]

8. I remember when liberals were liberals..

[Bjorn Against]

11. Wow, I guess that must mean that liberals and progressives do not exist outside of America

If being a liberal or progressive means supporting the Democratic Party then all those people who live in countries that do not have a Democratic Party could not possibly be liberal or progressive.

[sabrina 1]

14. I remember when the Democratic Party supported the people

way more than the Corporations.

[frylock]

15. i remember when we used to mock people over their blind loyalty to party over principle

[mmonk]

19. I guess that's a chicken or egg issue.

[dflprincess]

20. I remember when the Democratic party was something liberals or progressives could support n/t

[Zorra]

6. I can even remember as far back as when that described Democrats.

Yikes.

[haikugal]

9. That's still what it means...

the rest is Dixiecrat crap. Traitors.

[blkmusclmachine]

10. There you go looking back again.

+1

[bvar22]

12. I remember when Mainstrean, Centrist Democrats believe THIS:

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.--- FDR

What the Democratic Party once viewed as HUMAN RIGHTS,

the modern New Democrat Centrist Party view as Commodities,

to be sold at MAXIMUM PROFIT for the Ownership Class,

because THAT is the "Uniquely American Solution".



How FAR we have fallen. :cry:


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[frylock]

13. "liberal" just means "not republican" these days

[bigtree]

16. you want to give the impression that political initiatives are pure and unassailable

Fact is, our laws and policies are a compromise between different ideologies, even different expressions of liberalism. I think we all bring our pure motives to the system, but to expect them to emerge unaltered and exactly what our ambitions dictate is just not realistic. That's where you find principled liberals accepting less than they might have wanted or supporting onerous legislation to just hold on to a piece of their own ideal in some initiative or the other.That's where you find liberals defending policy which isn't purely progressive. We bring our highest ideals to the political system, but until there are a sufficient number of liberals in a position to dictate policy and legislation the result will always be a compromise. I think it's just fine to sit outside of all of that and hope that folks adhere to a pure philosophy when voting or advocating one measure or the other, but the political system isn't going to sit still while we wait for some perfect outcome. In fact, the political system has NEVER accommodated any pure progressive stance in legislation. Not even civil rights legislation included everyone, but it was still (correctly) seen as progressive.

[bluestate10]

22. The people complaining about President Obama and democrats in Congress.

Can recruit people to run for office. And get disappointed because the legislative results will not be close enough to their cherished utopia. The only difference between a blind liberal and a teafuck is the side of the political divide they reside in. Both, in the end, accomplish the same fucked up results, with the exception that teafucks have a clue of what they are doing.

[TheKentuckian]

17. Shit, I remember when even some Republicans didn't support such things and I'm not that old.

This country gets more full of shit by the day.

[bluestate10]

21. I remember with liberal or progressive meant that a person actually

stood for something and was willing to sacrifice and fight for their values. Now, a $5 per month fee send them running for the hills. Lecture me when your own footing is firm.