Is Progressive Regressive?

Now for the sake of this discussion, I sat up one night and wondered why so many of my friends have abandon the term “liberal” and prefer to use the term “Progressive”. Alan Colmes of Hannity and Colmes fame said he was proud to be Liberal and I have heard this many times coming from others as well.

It confuse me because one of my friends once gave me a long list of what he considers Progressive polices, which corresponds with the same liberal polices. Nothing change other than the name. So why the change? Well there is a political motive behind this. There is a move over the years to protraye the democrat party and the polices behind it as more moderate than the liberal world behind it.

The Republicans stupidly have given ground to the Democrats by acting more liberal than conservative, through not living up to the very values Reagan and many other conservatives believe. From monstrous budgets to over spending on nearly every pet project around. This was the very reason the democrats won control of the congress in 2004. Literary give control to nut jobs like Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank.

Suddenly the democrats acted more conservative than the Republicans. Out conservative the conservatives.
Yet not having to prove a Damm thing since their spending programs were just as bad and just as wild as Republicans.

In comes jumping in the newer title of being “Progressive” rather than liberal. A newer version of the same old story.
Going from renewable fuels to unionzation, Progressives could be called a political oxymoron since none of the so-call progressive inatitives are in actually liberal.
Each inatitionive would in effective strip people rights, some would even turned back the clock on including re-instituting Traiffs. It would prevent real competation in the market place and are trade deficits with other countries would go higher than what we currently have.

Our bank notes with other countries would increasing be withdrawn and create more umemployment. Strong unionization would in effect create more umemployment, our so-called crumbling infrastructure would continue to crumb since local and state governments would not have the money.

Federal deficits would run higher than what we currently have and with even higher cost on future so-called progressive programs tax reveune would botton out.

Trying to tax the rich and corporations would just create more umemployment since companies would not expand.

What Liberals and Progressives have never learned is simple and easy to understand when government taxes people suffer and in doing so there isn’t Progression, it is Regression.

One of my friends wrote the following These programs would:

“create a stable, prosperous middle class like we had before Reaganomics.”

Sadly Reaganomics was a progressive moment leading from the 80’s into the 90’s If a policy moves them closer to those two goals, they will find a reason to advocate it, regardless of how harmful the consequences of that policy may be.

Even the belief behind it is anything but regressive, It advocates a return to what they consider the good ole days of can I say liberalism.

Progressive moments promote individual rights, self determination and freedom and yet the progressives in the current moment wants to force unionization, universal healthcare, abortion without parental notification and restriction on trade. all of which is regressive. Is this so-called progressive moment freedom, or a danger to Freedom as we know it?