« Excuse our regularly scheduled prattling | Main | A challenge »

June 01, 2005

Sweet Jesus! Just what we need ...

...more whiney "progressives". Oh, it's a nicely designed website, cutesy coffeeshop theme, easy-on-the-eyes colors, but just what are they serving? I sampled a few of the so-called blends and found the same bitter base:

* The great challenge of progressive reform today is finding ways to counterbalance and reverse the pervasive privatization of risk we see across our society.

* ... the majority of Americans cannot persuade government to do what they want; significant populations probably less than a majority do not have basic rights (such as freedom from want) guaranteed.

* ... Social Security privatization ... an idea that has never been more than half baked.

And, of course, what progressive site would be complete without sobbing about that meany, John Bolton and how if he gets to the UN, they won't like us anymore ... whaaaa!

Add to that a smiling pic on the left sidebar of John Edwards and my heartburn is complete.

They pretend they are different, that they are for "individuals", but they offer up the same half-roasted, anti-individual-sovereignty beans socialists, communists and anarchists have been trying to get a government-enforced monopoly to serve to us great unwashed masses for decades.

For our own good, natch.

via Kevin at Whizbang

Posted by Darleen at June 1, 2005 06:30 AM


Well Darleen, I suppose I could just as easily summarize your blog--and Wizbang--as nothing more than offering up the same half-baked Right Wing intolerant narrow minded pablum that fascists and racists have been trying to force on the masses for centuries...but then I'd be accused of being a Leftie moonbat, wouldn't I?

Is everything really so black and white to you?

Posted by: Brad at June 1, 2005 11:21 AM

Darleen: Getting someone to sputter about "fascists and racists" means you have stung them into incoherence and very likely incontinence into the bargain. Well done.

Posted by: Jerry at June 1, 2005 07:39 PM

Let's see.

One comment about "pervasive privatization" without a coherent repsonse theat either supports or decries the concept.

One attributed but derogatory comment about the protection of constiutional guarantees as applied to minorities with out and response pro or con.

Another more specific comment about privatization and Social Security with out comment.

One of those "whinny' comments about Bolton that jibes at people who might want a more nuanced approch to the United Nations again with out any literate comment pro or con.

A snide comment about John Edwards.

I beleive that a narrow view of world, national and cultural issues can be instructive and counter balance more global perpectives.

None the less you seem to think or feel that any one with a differing opinion is not worthy of consideration and only deserves your disdain. The truly unfortunate aspect of your response is that it does not allow for any true give and take.

If you take any time to consider what Fascist implies you will have to agree that the term applies to a greater than lesser extent to the present administration. (Corporate interests or "the means of production controlling the government.")

Racists well I wouldn't go that far. but then ther are those pesky Snowflake adoption guidelines.

Rather than chorttle over the posibility that one of your critics is stunned into inconinence is simply lazy. I'm sure you can do better.

Finally, what makes you so angry and anti-America?

Posted by: Donald at June 2, 2005 04:35 PM

"If you take any time to consider what Fascist implies you will have to agree that the term applies to a greater than lesser extent to the present administration."

Or perhaps more likely this statement is empty of content.

Posted by: jerry at June 2, 2005 08:28 PM