[Jeff Thomas]

One of the personality characteristics I find most amusing in leftists is their pompous assumptions about their own intelligence.

For example, they never seem to pay a price in credibility, in spite of being wrong over and over again. Witness welfare reform, concealed carry legislation, or more recently the Iraq war. Leftists can tell us welfare reform will never work, concealed carry legislation will cause more blood to run in the streets, and the Iraq war will be a quagmire that causes WWIII. They're shrill, they're full of angst, and ... they have little logic, and even less success in seeing the future as it actually unfolds.

And yet ... they refer to themselves as "progressives", while they cling to demonstrably bankrupt concepts such as socialism. I love the irony of it.

Words do matter, and you and I help frame the debate everyday when we speak. Two can plan this game.

So, these days, when I debate or discuss these folks, I much prefer to refer to them as retrogrades ... and I never recognize their pompous and unjustified assumption of the high ground.

Silly name calling? I don't think so. When we allow leftists(such as many of these uneducated celebrities recently) to brazenly represent themselves as intellectually and morally superior, without challenge, then I believe we mistakenly give ground, and leave the impression we accept their illusory superiority.

Enough. Recognize these retrogrades as they are ... and let's make sure their credibility assumes its correct level. The gutter.

Regards from TX

[BigG]

"Progressive" in the sense that they want to see our form of govt "progess" to socialism and then communism with them as the nomenklatura.

[Dorrin79]

Jeff - you're correct.

Especially as regards the Left's apocalyptic predictions about the Iraq war, and their complete unwillingness to even offer a short, simple mea culpa

That said, conservatives have a few of those (although they do tend to be somewhat less aroogant about it) on their side as well.

the War on (some) Drugs would probably be the most extreme example of their own "institutional blindness"

[Bruce H]

No sir, they are true progressives. They make astounding progress at digging their holes deeper with every debate on every subject. Don't let them retrograde and have the possibility of getting out or their holes.

[Partisan Ranger]

To me the defining trait of a liberal...excuse me...progressive, is that they are either unwilling or incapable of learning from past experience. They seem to hold onto their mostly failed ideas regardless of evidence to the contrary.

Government programs help 'the poor'? Then why are there still poor people after LBJ's Great Society (Disaster)?

Gun control reduces crime? Then explain the crime rates in Chicago and D.C.

As a hard-core Constitutionalist, I would be more than willing to reconsider some or all of my conservative views, if I ever saw evidence that showed my views were wrong.

I have yet to see or hear of a successful socialist state. Until that happens or human nature does a 180, I think I'll stick with my views. But a leftist....evidence seems to mean nothing to them. It's the thought that counts.

[Soap]

The VERY first day this Leftist in my class spoke he proclaimed: "I really don't know any history or anything about history." But yet, every time he responds he acts like he just completed his doctorate in history. Typical Leftist...:fire:

[BigG]

Willful ignorance, Daniel. Underneath the veneer, follow the money and look for these general types: 1) pols who use the votes of the "downtrodden masses" who are benefitted by the "enlightened programs" of the pol. 2) slimeballs who provide services to the downtrodden masses thru contracts steered them by the pols. The slimeball contractors in turn provide kickbacks to the pols. 3) Useful idiots who have no idea what is going on but support the pols because it "feels right" or they are told to by their religious leader or other controller. :uhoh: Doo doo all around :uhoh:

[Standing Wolf]

In my experience, leftists are people ruled by fear, hatred, envy, malice, rage against authority, and more fear. Their claim that they're "progressive" is a plain old-fashioned lie. Some of them may even believe the lie, but that doesn't make it so.

[Pendragon]

"progress" is just moving towards something.

They never quite tell you what they are for - it's always just "we are for progress!".

Well, most people are "for good things and against bad things" The rub is in how you define good and bad.

Progressive is just a word they came up with because liberal kind of has a stigma associated with it (to a lot of people).

BTW - the goal is equality - total, utter, absolute equality.

[Soap]

BigG- Yeah...and it stinks.

[grampster]

Progressives? Illogical, Jim.

:D

[Shalako]

The goal of utter equality.

I think it really chaps their hide when someone, an individual perhaps, stands out from the crowd on their own merrit or fortitude. They can't stand that. They can't stand for an individual to have glowing success because of all the people that leaves behind the curve. Think of all the unsuccessful people that deserve success but didn't get it. That's just soooo sad. Boo frickin hoo. So they have to clamor for the gov't to equalize the playing field over and over and over again. Any person who is personally responsible, especially for their own protection (ie gunowners) makes the others feel incompetant and that is unfair. Boo hoo. So the dogooders have to have gov't mandated equality at all costs. Case in point---> school bussing. Think for a sec how that works. It punishes the successful to help out the under achievers. Some kid from the projects gets a hand up but some other kid inevitably gets a hand down to make room. Great idea! So you want to say something about it? That's what PC was invented for. It would not be Politically Correct to say publicly that school bussing is bad. You would be labled a racist. I truly believe PC was concocted to bridle the mouths of those that would disagree with the social engineering that is in play to, over the course of time, equalize the playing field at select individuals expense. If you don't think so, try to debate inner city school bussing some time.

Oh, and repeated attempts to equalize the playing field have resulted in contempt by all parties except for the dogooders. They pat themselves on the back.

Edited to add: Now if bussing was based on SCHOLASTIC MERIT ONLY, that would be fine by me. Skin color and bank account balance should have no affect on the bussing issue.

________________
If you baby people, they will be babied.

[Partisan Ranger]

"I think it really chaps their hide when someone, an individual perhaps, stands out from the crowd on their own merrit or fortitude.

Oh, exactly! I lived in Russia for three years, after the break up of the USSR. It amazed me how Russians, wonderful as they were, often resented anyone who achieved anything that made him/her stand out. I had a teacher friend who earned a prestigious teaching position in the States for a year. I told a few other teachers about his great achievement. The next week, he pulled me aside and pleaded with me not to tell anyone else.

Why? I asked.

His response: People will get jealous and someone may try to sabotage it so I can't go.

These are the fruits that socialism bears. Since I returned to America, I have been a hard-core right wing Constitutionalist and capitalist.

[BigG]

The herd mentality is worldwide. The dumocrats exploit it to the nth degree. Remember Ronald Reagan's misery index? Are you better off today than you were five years ago? They hat e somebody who keeps track!