Obama lacks decorum

[briansd1]

I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

I don’t support unrest that would shrink the economy and cause us all to become poorer. We need to keep the economy expanding.

I don’t see the contradiction in wanting wealth and social progress at the same time.

When you save a small percent of your salary every year, year after year, you end up with a substantial amount of money to bequeath onto the next generation. That’s the steady progress that I’m talking about.

Mark my words, we will have universal health care eventually in some form or another. It may not happen this year or next, but we will have it.

Sure, I’ve read history. The Supreme Court has reversed bad decisions in the past. They’ll do so again in the future. Or Congress can step in and pass a new law or constitutional amendment. That’s what President Obama was calling for.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.[/quote]

Brian: Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.

Further, your “Progressive” views, such as they are, stand at odds with actual Progressives, like those named above. No, what you advocate is more of a Leftist, confiscatory Big Government approach to “prosperity”, which isn’t possible and hasn’t happened in history. Hence, my use of the word “discursive” to describe your views.

One last thing: Conservative doesn’t mean “to conserve”. When you speak about “conserving back in time”, the word you should be using is “conservationist”, as in “one who conserves”. Conservatives don’t conserve, conservationists do.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.[/quote]

Brian: Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.

Further, your “Progressive” views, such as they are, stand at odds with actual Progressives, like those named above. No, what you advocate is more of a Leftist, confiscatory Big Government approach to “prosperity”, which isn’t possible and hasn’t happened in history. Hence, my use of the word “discursive” to describe your views.

One last thing: Conservative doesn’t mean “to conserve”. When you speak about “conserving back in time”, the word you should be using is “conservationist”, as in “one who conserves”. Conservatives don’t conserve, conservationists do.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.[/quote]

Brian: Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.

Further, your “Progressive” views, such as they are, stand at odds with actual Progressives, like those named above. No, what you advocate is more of a Leftist, confiscatory Big Government approach to “prosperity”, which isn’t possible and hasn’t happened in history. Hence, my use of the word “discursive” to describe your views.

One last thing: Conservative doesn’t mean “to conserve”. When you speak about “conserving back in time”, the word you should be using is “conservationist”, as in “one who conserves”. Conservatives don’t conserve, conservationists do.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.[/quote]

Brian: Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.

Further, your “Progressive” views, such as they are, stand at odds with actual Progressives, like those named above. No, what you advocate is more of a Leftist, confiscatory Big Government approach to “prosperity”, which isn’t possible and hasn’t happened in history. Hence, my use of the word “discursive” to describe your views.

One last thing: Conservative doesn’t mean “to conserve”. When you speak about “conserving back in time”, the word you should be using is “conservationist”, as in “one who conserves”. Conservatives don’t conserve, conservationists do.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]I’m a progressive who doesn’t want to upset the apple cart too much to achieve my social goals.

How do we get to enjoy the society we have today? It was progress little by little.[/quote]

Brian: Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.

Further, your “Progressive” views, such as they are, stand at odds with actual Progressives, like those named above. No, what you advocate is more of a Leftist, confiscatory Big Government approach to “prosperity”, which isn’t possible and hasn’t happened in history. Hence, my use of the word “discursive” to describe your views.

One last thing: Conservative doesn’t mean “to conserve”. When you speak about “conserving back in time”, the word you should be using is “conservationist”, as in “one who conserves”. Conservatives don’t conserve, conservationists do.

[briansd1]

[quote=PlnrBoy] but should Obama try to intimidate the Supreme Court by calling them out at the Address (of which I don’t think any President has done?).[/quote]

FDR railed against the Court is much harsher words. And FDR was our greatest president (at least in the modern sense)

FDR inherited the Great Depression. Obama inherited the Great Recession and averted a depression thanks to government stimulus.

I see a populist similarity between the two president.

The New Deal is what put money in the pockets of millions of Americans, enabled unprecedented economic expansion and made the corporations even wealthier.

Since Reagan, with the exception of the Clinton years, American consumption was fueled by debt not earnings.

[briansd1]

[quote=PlnrBoy] but should Obama try to intimidate the Supreme Court by calling them out at the Address (of which I don’t think any President has done?).[/quote]

FDR railed against the Court is much harsher words. And FDR was our greatest president (at least in the modern sense)

FDR inherited the Great Depression. Obama inherited the Great Recession and averted a depression thanks to government stimulus.

I see a populist similarity between the two president.

The New Deal is what put money in the pockets of millions of Americans, enabled unprecedented economic expansion and made the corporations even wealthier.

Since Reagan, with the exception of the Clinton years, American consumption was fueled by debt not earnings.

[briansd1]

[quote=PlnrBoy] but should Obama try to intimidate the Supreme Court by calling them out at the Address (of which I don’t think any President has done?).[/quote]

FDR railed against the Court is much harsher words. And FDR was our greatest president (at least in the modern sense)

FDR inherited the Great Depression. Obama inherited the Great Recession and averted a depression thanks to government stimulus.

I see a populist similarity between the two president.

The New Deal is what put money in the pockets of millions of Americans, enabled unprecedented economic expansion and made the corporations even wealthier.

Since Reagan, with the exception of the Clinton years, American consumption was fueled by debt not earnings.

[briansd1]

[quote=PlnrBoy] but should Obama try to intimidate the Supreme Court by calling them out at the Address (of which I don’t think any President has done?).[/quote]

FDR railed against the Court is much harsher words. And FDR was our greatest president (at least in the modern sense)

FDR inherited the Great Depression. Obama inherited the Great Recession and averted a depression thanks to government stimulus.

I see a populist similarity between the two president.

The New Deal is what put money in the pockets of millions of Americans, enabled unprecedented economic expansion and made the corporations even wealthier.

Since Reagan, with the exception of the Clinton years, American consumption was fueled by debt not earnings.

[briansd1]

[quote=PlnrBoy] but should Obama try to intimidate the Supreme Court by calling them out at the Address (of which I don’t think any President has done?).[/quote]

FDR railed against the Court is much harsher words. And FDR was our greatest president (at least in the modern sense)

FDR inherited the Great Depression. Obama inherited the Great Recession and averted a depression thanks to government stimulus.

I see a populist similarity between the two president.

The New Deal is what put money in the pockets of millions of Americans, enabled unprecedented economic expansion and made the corporations even wealthier.

Since Reagan, with the exception of the Clinton years, American consumption was fueled by debt not earnings.

[briansd1]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.
[/quote]

That’s fine. I’m glad there are social activists such as those you listed above.

Activism of the part of citizens is not the same as the President being an activist agitating for broad social changes overnight.

The President’s job is to manage the country in an orderly manner and to ensure continuity and prosperity for us all, while guiding us in the right direction.

The President must also gauge the degree of legislative and popular support for his agenda.

Martin Luther King was an activist and, when he was alive, he was ahead of his time. He helped us progress but he wasn’t President.

MLK’s ideas were revolutionary for his time. History has shown that revolutionaries are terrible managers who cause painful economic recessions.

[briansd1]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.
[/quote]

That’s fine. I’m glad there are social activists such as those you listed above.

Activism of the part of citizens is not the same as the President being an activist agitating for broad social changes overnight.

The President’s job is to manage the country in an orderly manner and to ensure continuity and prosperity for us all, while guiding us in the right direction.

The President must also gauge the degree of legislative and popular support for his agenda.

Martin Luther King was an activist and, when he was alive, he was ahead of his time. He helped us progress but he wasn’t President.

MLK’s ideas were revolutionary for his time. History has shown that revolutionaries are terrible managers who cause painful economic recessions.

[briansd1]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.
[/quote]

That’s fine. I’m glad there are social activists such as those you listed above.

Activism of the part of citizens is not the same as the President being an activist agitating for broad social changes overnight.

The President’s job is to manage the country in an orderly manner and to ensure continuity and prosperity for us all, while guiding us in the right direction.

The President must also gauge the degree of legislative and popular support for his agenda.

Martin Luther King was an activist and, when he was alive, he was ahead of his time. He helped us progress but he wasn’t President.

MLK’s ideas were revolutionary for his time. History has shown that revolutionaries are terrible managers who cause painful economic recessions.

[briansd1]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Progress, little by little? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony, Mary Church Terrell, Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr.

No, you’re dead wrong and obviously haven’t read your history. Progress has come in fits and starts and, in some cases, huge upheavals. Progressivism, by its very name, is the antithesis of incrementalism.
[/quote]

That’s fine. I’m glad there are social activists such as those you listed above.

Activism of the part of citizens is not the same as the President being an activist agitating for broad social changes overnight.

The President’s job is to manage the country in an orderly manner and to ensure continuity and prosperity for us all, while guiding us in the right direction.

The President must also gauge the degree of legislative and popular support for his agenda.

Martin Luther King was an activist and, when he was alive, he was ahead of his time. He helped us progress but he wasn’t President.

MLK’s ideas were revolutionary for his time. History has shown that revolutionaries are terrible managers who cause painful economic recessions.

[Author]

Posts