It’s Time to Talk about Neo-Progressivism

Don’t Call ‘Me’ A Progressive If …


clownBy now many of you know where ‘I’ stand when it comes to titles, labels, and categories that are broadly and many times ignorantly painted all over people or viewpoints. I’ve been over this before; how I’ve been labeled and attacked as Anti-Semite and Anti-Muslim, Sexist and Feminist, Democrat and Republican …one time or another, sometimes even simultaneously. What is it with all these confusing labels floating around and being used right and left? Seriously?! Neocon. Neoliberal. Repug. Bleeding-Heart Liberal. You name it!

Anyhow, today I am going to talk about another very confusing label-adjective that is being used too often, and most often too broadly, confusedly and inaccurately. The fashionable adjective is ‘progressive;’ being progressive. What does it really mean to be progressive? Once upon a time I was sure I knew what it meant. Then came a time when I was not sure what it was. And now, I don’t have a clue what it means to be a progressive. I’ll go even further and say, if it means what many people claim it does, and use it as, then, I consider it an adjective far from flattery.

Sure. You can look it up in any dictionary and give progressive a common definition. Progressive: Favoring or advocating change, improvement, or reform; employing or advocating more enlightened ideas… Or find the popular definition of progressivism as a political attitude favoring or advocating changes or reform through governmental action. If you were to stop here, stay within this once-upon-a-time definition and usage frame, and then call me a progressive, I’d nod and say ‘thank you.’ However life is never that simple. And in this case the overly popular progressive does not mean what it used to mean, and is not used as it once was.

Allow me to put it in perspective. I am going to use real-life context and experiences; the real life being my life, and the experiences coming directly from me and my surroundings: [Read more...]

Going on Record on Labeling & Labelers

Censorship Fanatics Come from All Walks of Life

censorIt is funny and sad at the same time. In the course of one week I have gone from Anti-Semite to Anti-Muslim. Within a week I have been labeled Filthy Jew-Basher and Fear-Mongering Islamophobic. I find it funny since the logic-free arguments of these fanatic labelers who are running around like headless (and brainless) chickens has a priceless comic quality to it; in so many ways it is simply hilarious to watch and listen to them. And I say sad, because the fanatic censorship climate created by these ignoramuses is not limited to their own eco-system; its incestuous multiplication and spread has been swallowing not only their immediate vicinity but the entire society at large via revised encyclopedias, academia, media …and especially the highly polarized forums and blogs.

It began last week when I wrote a piece on how in certain election campaigns candidates have been competing with each other on their degree of loyalty to a foreign country-Israel. And they were doing this openly. Those without blinders and with common sense got my points:

-Shouldn’t these candidates’ electability be about commitment and loyalty to our nation, its interests, and addressing its current humongous problems? We would be raising hell if we heard a candidate pledging their unconditional loyalty to France, Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan; and yes, they are all considered allies whether you agree or not! Then why should it be different when it comes to this particular controversial foreign country, Israel?

-Don’t we all consider foreign contributions to and support for our representatives here something to be truly alarmed about? At least distasteful and disgraceful? Large sums, direct and indirect support, by AIPAC and the like would be just that. No? Let me put it this way, in case you don’t get it: If the foreign entities were named something like Al-Hasmani Qaliani Fattullah, many would go out of their way to flag them down. AIPAC and the like are no different. They are foreign, with their own sets of interests and agendas; allies or not.

Since one of the candidates in my piece happened to be one with more special background and even more related facts, I went ahead and included some of  those important documented facts. Then, the moment I posted the above piece the attacks started pouring from the fanatic left (now pay attention, I am not saying ‘all lefties’ but ‘fanatic left’): I was accused of being Anti-Semite, Anti-Jew, Anti-Liberal, Anti-Democrats, Anti-Socialist…

-I noted that Ms. Schakowsky’s husband is a convicted felon. The courts found him guilty, he confessed to his crimes, and he went to prison. I guess based on the fanatic liberal argument: this documented well-known public fact was caused by Anti-Semite Anti-Jewish Anti-Liberals Anti-Democrats investigators, law enforcement, courts, judges, and yes, even prisons. How dare they investigate, convict and imprison the husband of a Jewish Pro-Israel Democrat Congresswoman?!! Further, how dare I or anyone else talk or write about this during the election campaign?!

In that piece I wrote a section on Jan Schakowsky’s role in criminal investigations by the FBI involving Chicago, and provided a link to a related article. This opened up an old wound for blinded ultra partisan Democrats who loved me conditionally: As long as your case involves Dirty Dick & Bush, as long as you point a finger at larva like Republican Hastert, we love you and root for you! Make sure there ain’t no bad democrats involved in your case, ok?

-Well, I talked about that case during my testimony under oath. Considering what side of the DOJ-FBI I’ve been on, even with a minute trace of untruthful response by me under oath they would have landed on me with both feet (wearing combat boots!!).

My piece included quotes from news articles on Jan Schakowsky’s status with AIPAC, and that despite some cosmetic, for-show-only, appearance of glitches between the two, AIPAC has been her supporter for a long time, and that as far as AIPAC is concerned Schakowsky is ‘Kosher.’ 

Based on the Fanatic Left’s argument; AIPAC (and its support) are considered KaKa-BooBoo-NoNo, if the recipient of the support happens to be Bush Era Bad Men, such as Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and Paul Wolfowitz. They have always emphasized the evil AIPAC connections of those Bus Era Neocons, and since they reserve the sole right to Fanatic Political Correctness Censorship, no one, I mean no one from the left, accused them of Anti-Semitism. Now, if the same AIPAC happens to be an avid supporter of Democratic candidates, all previous deals are off - based on the pro-censorship fanatic left code.  To point out Schakowsky’s Israel & AIPAC ties are considered Anti-Semitic and Anti-Jewish, but to repeatedly publicize Bush-Era Jewish Neocons’ Israel & AIPAC connections and ties are ‘kosher.’ You see what I’m getting at?

A few days ago, and a few days after the Schakowsky-Israel article, I wrote a brief piece on an infamous and controversial preacher, Fethullah Gulen, his documented background and international status, the never-solved or resolved mystery of his $20 billion organization’s net worth, and his new status as the biggest charter school operator in the US, with over 130 charter schools in 25 states. For decades his schools have been known as Madrasas in Turkey and Turkic nations, and now, interestingly and curiously, this man, through a maze of networks-organizations has been taking over US taxpayer funded charter schools.

As soon as I posted the article the attack of the fanatic left began pouring. Now, after being labeled as Anti-Jew, I was being given the new title of Anti-Muslim. Their fanatic blogs have been spitting out labels like machine guns: fear-mongering, Anti-Islam, Tea-Partier, Neo-Nazi Propaganda machine…you name it - And, my Muslim background and ancestry notwithstanding! How comic & moronic! Oh well, that pretty much describes the bunch.

I’ve been having fun watching the correlation between my posts and my follower status on twitter and Facebook. It is one of my pastimes when I have a few idle minutes in life. This is how it goes:

I write a piece on the Turkish military’s bad deeds, and within minutes I see my follower numbers drop by a few; all ultra-national Turkish entities. And a few minutes later it goes up by a few; recipients of abuses by the Turkish Military.

I write a piece on Israel lobby-AIPAC and there it goes; a drastic drop. Within a day or two I get a fresh list of supporters from the Palestinian side.

I write a piece on the some of the awful deeds of the Bush Administration, and if it has the target words-Cheney-Rice-Ashcroft, I become a hit with a few on the left; my numbers go up, and then down by a few departing fanatic Republicans. A few days later I write about the changes on Obama’s promised changes and his awful deeds against civil liberties, transparency and accountability, and a group of blind lefties depart from my list of supporters…

You really get the picture now; no? In a way I get to laugh a bit. The moronic blinded partisanship and biases can be kind of entertaining due to their inherent stupidious nature and even more stupid acts. This is how their reasoning (lack of!)would work if it was turned on them:

Obama says Taliban are bad bad people. Taliban are Muslim, thus, Obama is Anti-Muslim.

Or

Obama’s civilian casualties in Afghanistan-Pakistan are all Muslim, thus, Obama intends to erase Muslims from the earth.

As I’ve repeated several times: the fanatic left’s stupidious reasoning is summarized in the above examples, and how could I take it seriously and not laugh?!

On the other hand, the situation saddens me greatly, because this is exactly what the establishment wants: large numbers of ignoramuses bickering, blinded irrational loyalties, a highly divided society where people are busy spitting at each other and eating one another rather than going after the joint enemies of all … [Read more...]

‘This’ is the ‘Real’ Picture of Our War: Isn’t it Time?

Seeking Unison in Justified Outrage

 Atroc12
Atroc 3
atroc 45

Please take a moment and look at these pictures. Really look at them. Not just a cursory glance or a rushed and distracted glance.

Isn’t it heartbreaking looking at them? Isn’t it revolting and outrageous? 

Next, please read, process, and think about the following few lines. I mean, really take them in and truly process their meaning and implications.

The severely injured and crippled children in these pictures are innocent victims of ‘our’ bombings in Afghanistan.

We, you and I, paid for every miniscule molecule of the bombs that brought this horror upon these innocent children. We financed the entire assault with our tax money, so are rightfully considered the financiers of what fell upon these innocent children.

Our representatives, the ones we elected and gave power to, decided upon and sanctioned these atrocities on our behalf, and in our name. We, you and I, likewise sanctioned them, and consented to become the financiers of their implementation.

We, you and I, are directly responsible for what you see in these pictures, and much worse and more, and implicating many more.

We, you and I, did ‘this’, and we are still doing it.

Now please tell me, should it matter whether you are pro-choice or pro-life when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you are prochoice I doubt you’d make ‘this’ a choice of yours; as a decent human being. Or, if you are prolife I seriously doubt you’d sanction and finance ‘this,’ - do ‘this’ to other fellow human beings. After all, isn’t ‘a life a life…’?

Please tell me, should it matter whether you are a conservative or a liberal when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you are a true conservative I believe you would be pro-defense not pro-offense, and offenses such as ‘this’ would offend you a great deal. And if you consider yourself a liberal, then I assume you hold high a human’s right to live and exist with dignity, no matter who or where they are.

Please tell me, should it matter whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Buddhist when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you truly have faith in the teachings of either Jesus, Moses, Mohammad, or Buddha, you go by their universal teaching and common proclamation that ‘Thou Shall Not Kill,’ not ‘thou shall sanction and condone violence like ‘this’ on ‘innocent lives’ in the name of false security and under the excuse of terror.’

Should it matter whether the children above are Afghans, Mexicans, or Americans? Are these lives worth less than others; less than ours? Wouldn’t have we been livid, fuming with rage and determination to seek justice, even if only one of these innocent children was on our soil attacked by foreign mighty powers, intentionally or not?

So please tell me, why do we stand divided when it comes to ‘this’?

Why is it that we go on sanctioning and financing ‘this,’ these outrageous and revolting offenses that are being brought upon real lives; innocent human lives?

Why can’t we unite on ‘this,’ a truly significant issue that deals with life and death?

Why don’t we put aside other differences, and jointly take a stand, as pro-choice, pro-life, conservative, liberal, Christian, Jew, Muslim, and Buddhist, who should all consider ‘this’ a significant violation of what we believe in?

Isn’t it time? Looking at these pictures, I say it is way past time. Don’t you?

# # # #

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.