Progressive Bushs stick their foot in their mouths...again

[GenSeneca]

If I govern from a generally conserative ideology, and cave in a few areas -- am I suddenly a raging progressive?

​

Can someone legitimately call themselves a vegetarian even though they eat meat from time to time?
Can someone who occasionally punches people in the face be taken seriously when they tell you they're a pacifist?

Does abandoning Conservative principles make you a raging Progressive? Not necessarily... However, it should disqualify you from being considered a Conservative. Once again, every time Conservatives compromise, the Progressives win. On that fact there is no room for argument.

I don't think this is exactly what progressives in this country want.

Then you should educate yourself on the Progressive philosophy... Tell me, what limits do Progressives recognize regarding the authority of the state? What aspects of private or public life do they not wish to regulate?

I am simply interested in the idea that it seems many hold that anyone who ever strays in the least bit from some rigid ideology must be branded with the scarlet letter of progressive.

Stray? Bush didn't stray, he ran in a dead sprint toward Progressivism but simply called it something else... Bush termed his Progressive accomplishments "Compassionate Conservatism", a truly Orwellian monicker.

And the Conservative ideology should be rigid; standing on principle and refusing to compromise is the only way to stop Progressives from winning.

I don't get it -- progressives also believe that we need to bring all the troops home

I've got to stop you right there because that's Bull Shat... Progressives on both sides support military interventionism and nation building. Where the Progressives on the Left and the Right split depends on whether the President is a member of their party and whether or not America has "national interests" at stake. Let's not forget, the Left (including the Media) stopped screaming for the troops to come home the minute Obama was elected, then there's Gitmo, TORTURE!, and all the rest of the "issues" that no longer mattered to the Left once their guy was in office.

is Ron Paul a progressive -- is anyone who calls for the troops to come home progressive? To take your logic on the matter -- yes -- he is a progressive, and any conservative record he has established is null in void.

Being Non-Interventionist is the Conservative (Classical Liberal) position. Interventionism is the Progressive position - The Right is eager to intervene when they believe it's in our "National Interests" (Afghanistan, Iraq) while the Left is eager to intervene when it's done under the guise of purely altruistic "Humanitarian" reasons (Darfur, Egypt). If you learn the history of the Progressive movement, you can see where the Republican party shifted from Non-Interventionism to the Progressive position of Interventionism - Teddy Roosevelt.

Who is it that is a real conservative?

Sadly, I think Progressivism (and the equally insidious ideology known as Pragmatism) has completely infected both parties to the point where I doubt there are any "real" Conservatives (Classical Liberals) in American politics - at least none that are apparent on the national stage. Ron Paul is certainly the closest, but calling yourself a Conservative while packing pork into bills you know are going to pass and then voting against the bills is like claiming to be a Vegetarian while in the process of eating a T-Bone steak. Hopefully the Tea Party and TP candidates will reverse the decades of Progressive decay and restore the Republican party to it's Conservative/Classical Liberal roots.