Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
For frustrated, angry, disappointed, and overwhelmed voters.
Drill!
Thank Our Troops!
Will any VP make a difference in Obama's campaign?
Conventions
- 8/25 - 8/28 DEMOCRATIC NATL. CONVENTION (Denver, CO)
- 9/1 - 9/4 REPUBLICAN NATL. CONVENTION (Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN)
Blog Archive
-
►
2008
(54)
- ► 07/27 - 08/03 (1)
- ► 07/13 - 07/20 (2)
- ► 06/15 - 06/22 (2)
- ► 06/08 - 06/15 (3)
- ► 05/11 - 05/18 (4)
- ► 05/04 - 05/11 (2)
- ► 04/13 - 04/20 (1)
- ► 03/30 - 04/06 (2)
- ► 03/23 - 03/30 (2)
- ► 03/16 - 03/23 (2)
- ► 03/09 - 03/16 (2)
- ► 03/02 - 03/09 (5)
- ► 02/24 - 03/02 (3)
- ► 02/17 - 02/24 (3)
- ► 02/10 - 02/17 (2)
- ► 02/03 - 02/10 (4)
- ► 01/27 - 02/03 (2)
- ► 01/20 - 01/27 (4)
- ► 01/13 - 01/20 (2)
- ► 01/06 - 01/13 (6)
-
▼
2007
(36)
- ► 12/30 - 01/06 (3)
- ► 12/23 - 12/30 (5)
- ► 12/09 - 12/16 (2)
- ► 12/02 - 12/09 (4)
- ► 11/25 - 12/02 (3)
- ► 11/18 - 11/25 (9)
3 comments:
A "progressive" is - evidently - the opposite of a "regressive". And a "regressive" is presumably someone who votes for Republicans. Honestly, I think the use of the term "progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to move away from "liberal". But conservatives are a clever lot and will have no trouble coming up with a fitting - and damning - rejoinder. Unfortunately, "tax and spend" has been used to death. Any suggestions? I'm drawing a blank. (I guess this conservative isn't so clever.)
And a "secular progressive" is nothing if not redundant.
How about calling "progressives", "regressives"? It is certainly appropriate given their affinity for spinning everything in their past that they can't later defend.
Post a Comment