Copyright © 2019 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 31, 2019
STUCK BETWEEN TWO IDEOLOGIES
Copyright © 2019 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, January 9, 2019
NO SURPRISE HERE: DEMOCRATS ARE LIBERAL
34% - Moderate
13% - Conservative
22% - Moderate
04% - Liberal
28% - Conservative
22% - Liberal
Copyright © 2019 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.
Monday, September 20, 2010
PROGRESSIVES: LIBERALS IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING
Ever notice when the media tries to slip something into our thought processes? It may seem innocent on the surface, but it actually has some subliminal meaning. Maybe it's a new fashion statement or perhaps a new word added to our vernacular. They slip it in then build on it until it is an accepted concept. For example, the media has been increasingly talking about "Progressive" Democrats as if they are just that, people interested in implementing positive changes to our government. If you listen to the press carefully, you would get the impression that "progressives" are either moderates or possibly even conservatives. I'm sorry, this is just not so as "progressives" actually represent the left side of American politics.
The term "progressive" goes back to the Progressive Era which is considered the period between the 1890s to 1920s. This was an important movement aimed at cleaning up political corruption in government and women's suffrage, among other things. A diverse set of noteworthy people gravitated to the movement including Andrew Carnegie, Thomas Edison, Charles Evans Hughes, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Booker T. Washington, Upton Sinclair, and Republican Presidents William Howard Taft and Theodore Roosevelt (who implemented many such reforms during his presidency).
More recently, the "Progressive Democrats of America" (PDA) was formed in 2004 primarily by supporters of Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean. Make no mistake, it is not working in concert with moderate Democrats or Republicans, and it is most definitely not conservative in nature. They are unabashed liberals and although I do not agree with their policies, it is their right to hold their beliefs. I believe the term "progressive" was deliberately selected to conjure up images from a bygone era.
However, my problem is with the "progressive" label. One could deduce if you are not in agreement with the "progressive" point-of-view then you would be an "obstructionist" and therefore an impediment to progress. This is a very clever way of manipulating public perceptions for political gain, something the media seems more than willing to advance.
To me, "progressive" is subliminal brainwashing of the worst kind as it is misleading the public to believe their policies are not liberal in nature and therefore are more positive and palatable to implement. The reality is that "progressive" is a misnomer as it represents the doctrine of the left. One could, therefore, correctly assume that "progressives" are nothing more than liberals in sheep's clothing.
Now, about those "Blue Dog" Democrats which we used to call "Dixiecrats"...
Keep the Faith!
Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.
Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M. Bryce & Associates (MBA) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com
For Tim's columns, see:
http://www.phmainstreet.com/timbryce.htm
Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.
Tune into Tim's THE BRYCE IS RIGHT! podcast Mondays-Fridays, 11:30am (Eastern).
Copyright © 2010 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
A NEW AMERICAN CIVIL WAR
Make no mistake, the country is in the midst of powerful class struggle between the "haves" and "have nots," a struggle between capitalism and socialism, bordering on a bona fide Civil War. Actually, it began with the hotly contested 2000 presidential election and escalated with the election of our current president with a liberal agenda. The seeds were planted during the Clinton impeachment hearings where politicians voted along political lines. Since then, there is a no-holds-barred approach to politics in this country, and the viciousness of the rhetoric has become dangerously reckless.
Since 2000 when the Democrats accused the Republicans of stealing the election, the tactic has been to attack unmercifully, attack to discredit, and attack until you get your way, then, deny any wrongdoing, and blame others. If you pose the slightest threat to the party's political agenda, you are vilified as was the case recently with Rush Limbaugh. To discredit the outgoing president and assure there would not be a political legacy, they attacked and ridiculed George W. Bush to the point of riding him out of town on a rail (by his own party no less). In other words, liberal politics have taken on a "take no prisoners" approach, the likes of which we have not seen since the Watergate hearings.
There is little, if any, bipartisanship in the drafting of laws and running the government. The administration has basically thrown its weight into its liberal agenda, while trying to paint Republican lawmakers as impediments to change by questioning their patriotism. Now, more than ever, a line has been drawn in the sand between liberal and conservative principles, and there is no true initiative to seek common ground. After all, why should there be if you control both houses of Congress and the White House?
To paraphrase Lincoln, "Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure." The question now has become, is capitalism wrong and should it be replaced by socialism? I contend capitalism is correct and socialism sets a dangerous course of destruction for this country. The differences between the two ideologues are significant and incompatible, yet this is what now faces the country. Yes, we are very much involved with a titanic class struggle in this country. And Yes, aside from armed conflict, it has all of the earmarks of a Civil War.
In the years preceding the first American Civil War, Congress was embroiled in a similar clash of ideologues, this time is was bitterly divided over the spread of slavery into the Western states. The Missouri Compromise and subsequent Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, for example, pitted the North versus the South in who would control the Congress. The discourse between the two camps ultimately caused political parties to collapse and new ones to emerge, such as the Republican Party. The Democratic Party was split along sectional lines as a result of the conflict.
It occurs to me that today's political differences may also shake the current parties to their very foundations. They will either change or split. Whereas the Republican Party had been moving towards the middle since the departure of Ronald Reagan, it is now moving rapidly back to conservative principles. The Democrats with their liberal agenda has basically forsaken moderates. Both parties have to shore up their differences internally or face a new third party to emerge, a moderate party.
The Republicans have become complacent, and put on the defensive by some clever political maneuvering by the Democrats and, as such, have been politically reactive, not proactive. This needs to change and an organized approach must be devised to draw up battle plans and devise tactics. Some suggestions:
1. Take the Media to task, which is nothing more than the mouthpiece of the Liberal Party; put them on the defensive; this includes television, radio, newspapers, the Internet. I mean really put on a full court press. Condemn their editorials, refuse to support their advertisers, and discredit their integrity by debunking the illusion they are "unbiased." Do not allow them to vilify conservative leaders like they did to Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin, and Rush Limbaugh. Their brainwashing techniques must be broken.
2. Challenge the Liberal Party, anywhere and anytime. I do not know an issue where we need to be on the defensive; we must go on the offensive. However, to contrast Conservatives from Liberals, we must do it with dignity, and tact. Unlike our opposition, we believe in honest debate. We should never stoop to their level of name calling, venom and lying. We must be forthright in our arguments and do it with class.
3. Groom replacements to take over. Ronald Reagan was a great president and we now hear his name mentioned as the savior of the party. But let's be realistic, Reagan is dead and buried, let's move along, I'm sure he would want us to move forward and not look back. To this end, I suggest establishing a bona fide school to teach conservative doctrine, and hone skills in communications, management, administration, drafting legislation, and political tactics. In other words, instead of a disorganized approach for grooming the future leaders of our country, let's devise a structured approach which promotes good government based on sound management principles. The nation needs leaders, not reactionaries.
4. Develop a sound political strategy that provides for a strong war chest to fund political campaigns, devise Congressional target areas, and take back the Congress and the White House.
It is sad to think we are at war with our own countrymen, but the fact remains there are people who are bent on changing the basic way of life in this country, such as redistributing the wealth through expanded government. They have already fired the first shot, are well organized, and now in control. It is time for Conservatives to wake up and get its act together before the changes implemented by the Liberals become irreversible.
Keep the Faith!
Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.
Tim Bryce is the Managing Director of M. Bryce & Associates (MBA) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com
For Tim's columns, see:
http://www.phmainstreet.com/timbryce.htm