It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Elizabeth Warren's 11 Commandments of Progressivism

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Elizabeth Warren currently and clearly the darling of progressives wherever she goes. While she has said she is not running in 2016 and supports Hilary she has quite the populist following.

After all the progressiveness I can stomach at this point my suspicion is Hilary is going to tag her for the VP position and if elected go about her merry way finishing of the US as a free republic.

Here's what Warren say's are the (her) 11 Commandments of Progressivism.

Elizabeth Warren's 11 Commandments of Progressivism


"What are our values?" Warren asked the audience, some of whom held up "Run Liz Run" signs. "What does it mean to be a progressive?" She went on to outline 11 tenets of progressivism:

1. "We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it."

2. "We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth."

3 "We believe that the Internet shouldn't be rigged to benefit big corporations, and that means real net neutrality."

4. "We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage."

5. "We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them."

6. "We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt."

7. "We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions."

8. "We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work."

9. "We believe that equal means equal, and that's true in marriage, it's true in the workplace, it's true in all of America."

10. "We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform."

11. "And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies. We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!"

I'm OK with #1-4 as long as we leave out political and monetary carbon scams.

#5 Is going to be a problem.

#6 Well that horse has already fled the barn.

#7 Sounds good but considering that we now have about 2 workers supporting each retiree this is also a big problem. Under funded pensions are also a disaster.

#8-9 Seems self evident.

#10 Sounds like more "amnesty" to me.

#11 Corporation not people, check. Women control their own bodies, check. Overturn Hobby Lobby, no check.

As I said earlier I'm concerned Hilary is going to scoop Warren up as VP and ride to victory in 2016. I for one have had enough "Hope and Change" to last several lifetimes.

Thoughts?




posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I don't have a problem with any of the rather idealized statements on the list.

The problem is most political ideology looks decent on paper. There isn't a politician out there that practices what they preach beyond duping us into voting for them. I don't like labels like Progressives, NeoCons, Liberals or any of the innuendo used to describe different parties and political alignments. They are all used to divide and polarize the populace.

It's time to realize that whichever person or political party is in office we're getting screwed. There aren't republicans, democrats, socialists, communists, etc on Capitol Hill any longer, there is nothing more than a bunch of Plutocrats who don't care about us. Of course, most of them will get re-elected, and will get another POS president, since after all most of America doesn't care about America either.

Politicians want us fighting amongst ourselves.. but it really is us against them.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

We've become a nation where we have become reliant on government instead of simply having a government represent us.

Basically, progressives think that you can't do anything, succeed at anything, without the help of government.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago


As I said earlier I'm concerned Hilary is going to scoop Warren up as VP and ride to victory in 2016. I for one have had enough "Hope and Change" to last several lifetimes.

Thoughts?

I think that the only candidate that has a chance to win in 2016 is someone who is centerist, and these "planks" are mostly pandering to the far left. It's highly unlikely that I would vote for Hillary, though I wouldn't rule it out, but I would never vote for anyone who had this woman on their ticket. Radical liberalism has just about bankrupted this country, I will never support it.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Evidently the woman thinks that the country is populated by sufficient clueless regressives and terminally ignorant liberals . . . that when one adds in the drunken conservatives . . . a critical mass will think the list is rosey and wonderful.

Sigh.

About what year did they murder critical thinking anyway?



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Why would 5 be a problem??? They are doing the job that is the foundation of that industry. Its not like fast food is small business and raising the minimum wage will put then out of business
And i agree with what you have to say about 6 but that doesn't mean we can't bring the horse back. Either education is about making money or it is about advancing the country, what does america want it to be??



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Her #1 about Wall Street .... stronger rules and tougher enforcement of what? Her 'Wall Street needs tougher rules and stronger enforcement' is a good sound bite, but WHAT EXACTLY is she proposing? And considering her own involvement with corporations and big business .... I'm not buying her attempt to look like she's for 'the regular guy' and not big business. Shes' used her lawyer degree to defend big companies against people who they injured.

Her #3 about Internet Neutrality .... again what exactly does she mean? When the far left (not regular left, but far left) starts talking about internet neutrality or about forcing fair time or a balanced media ... it usually means they are whining that the right is doing a better job in the media and have bigger audiences and they are sour grapes. (IMHO) She has a proven track record of supporting big business against the little guy so I"m not buying 'internet neutrality against big business. ' And she didn't say exactly how big business skews the internet.

Her #4 and #5 proves that she doesn't understand basic economics.

Her #7 is entitlement society. I agree that social security and medicare are good things. But what exactly is the federal government supposed to do about company 'pensions'?? It's not their business. That's the business of corporations. And it's a perk that companies can pick or choose to provide or not.

Her #10 is code for 'amnesty'.

Her #11 says that she doesn't respect the Constitutional right of people to live according to their faith and she wishes to impose her own beliefs on those religious folks who are protected to be able to run their business in accordance with their faith.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

So you agree with the list as long as it is not the government that makes it happen?
Those seems like things that a government that is representing us would want to do for us, but that must be like ultra left wing liberal speaking.
ETA: And I think a simple solution to 4 and 5 would to make it only apply to fortune 500 companies or maybe even just the top 250
Cause I do see how those can be counter productive to starting a small business and trying to expand it
edit on thFri, 18 Jul 2014 15:47:53 -0500America/Chicago720145380 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: adjensen

Actually outside the US those points are considered common sense. Not liberal or conservative.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago
Well, it all sounds pretty reasonable to me. If you're concerned about Warren on a winning Democrat ticket, I suggest you find somebody palatable to your fellow Americans and try to get them elected.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

#5 is a problem because the words "livable wage" is highly subjective. I'm not againt raising minimum wage to some degree. Throwing those types of words around serve no purpose. If she simply said minimum wage should be raised to X or Z then we'd be able to make an educated assessment



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago

#11 Corporation not people, check. Women control their own bodies, check. Overturn Hobby Lobby, no check.

Thoughts?


The reason Hobby Lobby won is because Corporations are people, legally speaking. So you can't check that first one and not check the last one. It's either both or none.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

And how's that working out in places like Greece and Spain?


Unfortunately for Ms Warren, she lives in the US, where enough people distrust the radical left to hopefully keep them from making a bad situation even worse.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
Evidently the woman thinks that the country is populated by sufficient clueless regressives and terminally ignorant liberals . . .

Indulge me this story ... Yesterday I spent the morning in the hospital emergency room for my daughter and then the afternoon with a medical specialist. Afterwards, we were at a pharmacy in town getting a bunch of prescriptions filled. A gaggle of middle aged women came up to the pharmacy and they were all gushing about how they saw Obama at the Charcoal Grill in town eating a burger. 'He is such a regular guy'. 'Oh I'm still all jumpy, it was so exciting'. 'He's a great guy and so down to earth'. 'Hillary is next!' They actually said those things. I swear they were all swooning. Those women bought the Charcoal Grill staged photo op and Obama suddenly became a 'regular guy' to them because he staged a burger eating event in town. So when the politicians think the country is populated by the clueless and the terminally ignorant ... I believe it.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm



The reason Hobby Lobby won is because Corporations are people, legally speaking. So you can't check that first one and not check the last one. It's either both or none.


I was under the impression Hobby Lobby won because it was a closely held company and the contraceptive mandate requiring them to supply abortifacts to employees was against the owners first amendment religious freedoms.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: Sremmos80

#5 is a problem because the words "livable wage" is highly subjective. I'm not againt raising minimum wage to some degree. Throwing those types of words around serve no purpose. If she simply said minimum wage should be raised to X or Z then we'd be able to make an educated assessment


Ok, I see what you are getting at.
I would have to agree that "livable wage" is subjective.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: adjensen
a reply to: intrepid

And how's that working out in places like Greece and Spain?


Don't know. I don't live there. I DO live in Canada though and we're doing just fine. Remember that recession thingie that the world experience over the last 5 years or so? We didn't even though out #1 trading partner(The US) got nailed BIG TIME!



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

If that was the case it wouldn't have been "Burwell v. Hobby Lobby". It would be "Burwell v. Owners of Closely held Coporations".

It all hinges on "Corporate Personhood" and the claim that Corporations can hold Religious Beliefs.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

HC is DOA. She can't last through a Dem primary.

EW needs to take a stand on the extra-legal spying on US citizens and others.

Buckle up.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: beezzer

So you agree with the list as long as it is not the government that makes it happen?
Those seems like things that a government that is representing us would want to do for us, but that must be like ultra left wing liberal speaking.
ETA: And I think a simple solution to 4 and 5 would to make it only apply to fortune 500 companies or maybe even just the top 250
Cause I do see how those can be counter productive to starting a small business and trying to expand it


What's that "C" word that describes a government that decides how much work for how much pay? Oh yes the same government that pays doctors the same amount as bus drivers. I think it's ummm... Communist.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join