Why does Fox not get to host a Democratic debate

[SgtLanquel]

Quite true, I guess most conservatives have to catch their info while working while the dems are sitting on their ass at home watching the View and shit like that.

heh....well most nights FOXNews pulls about a million viewers and the other cable news stations combined pull less than that.

The other 314,000,000 Americans apparently have other things to do with their time

Yet somehow the million FOXers are terrified of The Liberal Media and the non-FOX cable newsers are terrified that FOX might somehow tilt the world

The other 314,000,000 Americans don't give a whole lot of worry to either silly fear

 

[vitterd]

Quite true, I guess most conservatives have to catch their info while working while the dems are sitting on their ass at home watching the View and shit like that.

yeah.....those Ponzi schemes that repubs come up with take a lot of work. You should watch American greed on CNBC.....it's like an hour long tea party report.

 

[SheriffJoe]

Yeah they've definitely bastardized the term in a lot of ways. Guess can't blame Russ for saying change the dictionary...

As one who admires Jefferson, this is a subject that irks me. Obviously you feel the same.

The history behind the, we'll call it 'transition', from Progressive to 'liberal' is amusing. Basically, the statists chose 'liberalism' as yet another more palatable updated name for that tired destructive failure we all know as socialism.

Classical Jeffersonian liberalism promotes freedom, individual rights and the free market of ideas and goods and services, whereas modern liberalism (Progressivism) promotes the redistribution of wealth through ever-growing, invasive, ponderous, inefficient centralized government. Indeed, Progressivism's natural enemies are limited government, free markets, private property and the rule of law. And, of course, individualism. These are all things Jefferson wrote about extensively.

To your point, obviously words have multiple meanings, but it's not as if Progressivism is a spin-off of classical liberalism; it is the antithesis of classical liberalism.

So should Jeffersonian liberals find this t-shirt offensive?

 

[mountain]

yeah.....those Ponzi schemes that repubs come up with take a lot of work. You should watch American greed on CNBC.....it's like an hour long tea party report.

The guy that wrote the book, the perpetrator of the mother of all Ponzi schemes, Bernie Madoff was a huge democrat and contributed to Hillary's campaign in 2008..according to CNN

 

[vitterd]

The guy that wrote the book, the perpetrator of the mother of all Ponzi schemes, Bernie Madoff was a huge democrat and contributed to Hillary's campaign in 2008..according to CNN

There are about a thousand of those schemes.

 

[PatsFan1283]

As one who admires Jefferson, this is a subject that irks me. Obviously you feel the same.

The history behind the, we'll call it 'transition', from Progressive to 'liberal' is amusing. Basically, the statists chose 'liberalism' as yet another more palatable updated name for that tired destructive failure we all know as socialism.

Classical Jeffersonian liberalism promotes freedom, individual rights and the free market of ideas and goods and services, whereas modern liberalism (Progressivism) promotes the redistribution of wealth through ever-growing, invasive, ponderous, inefficient centralized government. Indeed, Progressivism's natural enemies are limited government, free markets, private property and the rule of law. And, of course, individualism. These are all things Jefferson wrote about extensively.

To your point, obviously words have multiple meanings, but it's not as if Progressivism is a spin-off of classical liberalism; it is the antithesis of classical liberalism.

So should Jeffersonian liberals find this t-shirt offensive?

Yeah, definitely not a spinoff of the word. Couldn't have said it better myself.