Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What is a "progressive" vs a "liberal" ?

Conservatism is, among other things, the advocacy of smaller national government in keeping with a strict construction and the original intent of the United States Constitution. It is, however, a popular title, and many choose to call themselves by it merely because apparent-conservatism gets votes. Many of those who call themselves conservative for this reason are, at best, highly imperfect in their conservatism. It's the nature of politics. One judges a school of thought, however, properly by its tenets, not by the varied and sundry beliefs of each of its claimed adherents. The Roman emperor Tiberius Claudius, after all, called himself a Republican, and Torquemada a Christian.

From the 50's on the movement that goes by the title "conservative" has been pushing for more intrusive government. As a whole they don't exactly say that, but the goals they push for necessitate that fact and the candidates they support invariably work towards more government involvement in everyone's day to day life.

I think the problem is that you're calling neocons conservatives. They are not. Conservatives are right wingers. Neo-conservatism is a leftist phenomenon. They are in fact the philosophic descendants of leftist apostates, kicked out of the mainstream left for being pro-interventionist against international communism during the height of the Cold War. They were then taken in by the old right (authentic conservatives) because they shared an opposition to international communism.

As a result of this alliance against the mainstream left (who were apologists for international communism), the neocons partially adopted some of the traditional values of the old right (prompting the traditional left to disparagingly label them "neo-conservatives"), but they still remained fundamentally leftist in their outlook, especially with regard to the role of the Federal Government in society, i.e., an expansive one without regard for constitutional limits.

Gradually, due to the level of control held by the traditional left over the MSM, old right conservatives found themselves pushed out of public view. Neocons were then presented to the general public as the only remaining legitimate representatives of "modern conservatism," and dubbed "the new right."

This was a deception. Limited constitutional government according to a strict interpretation is, and has always been, central to conservatism in America. Do the "modern right" (or "new right" or "neo-conservatives," whatever you choose to call them) seem to be advocating that? Of course not. They are, fundamentally, leftists who have, with the help of the leftist MSM, misappropriated the right wing/conservative mantle.

Give us a list of conservatives from the 1950's on.

You want a list of folks from that time who were proponents of a strictly limited Federal Government in accordance with the US Constitution? That would be quite a list (Check out the John Birch Society and the US Constitution Party for starters). These folks, of course, were gradually written out of the new conservative movement and replaced by so called "big government conservatives." If that's not an oxymoron, nothing is.

Given at birth the name was Barry. Paid for name was and is "Barak" Just heard about this legal name change of his. I for one refuse to use his MauMau (he gave himself) name ever again.

You are referring to the wrong Barak. The Barack you are referring to is the pres.

I am well aware of the John Birch society and they were written out of the true goals of the conservative movement by at least the 1960's if not right out of the gate. The US Consitution Party was pissed on by mainstream conservatives from day one. Funny use of the word "gradually."

You folks have to go by actions that speak louder than words. All of Barry's and his administration have been with funding of the biggest corporations, My friends that only spells "Fascism". I wish you folks really understood what fascism really is and you would understand why both parties are so far gone in this direction.


WOODROW WILSON, Before it was TEEDY ROOSVELT, his cousin FRANKLIN, Jimmy Carter and now Obama have all been committed to the principles of Fascism and have been in the Oval office. The rest were steeped in the same fascism but just weren't as committed as the rest. By the way it's the Supreme Court that has been one of their most powerful tools.

No, but you`re pretty close, I think it`s Warren Buffet.( Well I just checked and I was mistaken ...... Progressive= Peter Lewis Geico= Warren Buffett [ I even spelled Buffett wrong]
I should mind my own business.

Bob