are welcome in the Democratic Party but not to "control" it." And the word progressive was in deliberately placed in quotations because that snippet was part of a larger conversation about the characteristics that set DU "progressives" apart from the progressives of the political left.



Because I hold political views/opinions that are left of center ... and therefore, I fall on the Left of the political spectrum.

Now to answer your curiosity:

My position on the NSA: I recognize the importance, and necessity, of the NSA, as a branch of the nation's security apparatus. I believe we must be vigilant to maintain an appropriate balance between the security of the nation (and its peoples) and the freedom rights of the people. And this security requires a measure of "spying" ... I have no problem with the NSA "spying" on other countries, even our "allies"; I have more of a problem when they "spy" on the people of the USA. In general, I am of the opinion that the NSA, on occasion, has over-stepped that balance; but, largely, has gotten it right. I am, also, of the opinion that much of the "concern" in the media is over-blown and the NSA's "spying" doesn't register among my top 10 of priorities.

My position on TPP: I have no opinion of TPP; nor, will I until the final agreement is made public. I have no problem with Fast Track, and even less, now that the deal provides for the 120 and 60 ... that is plenty of time for the public to engage in an INFORMED debate, that will end in an up or down vote. At this point, TPP doesn't rate among my top 1,000,000 of priorities ... though, that will change once the final agreement is made public.

My position on offering up cuts to Social Security: I oppose all cuts to Social Security, and support increases to beneficiaries (though would limit any increases to those earning under the current cap). However, to speak directly to your question, I have no problem with President Obama's offering a CCPI formulation in the debt ceiling/budget battles, as I recognized it (hell, even the republicans recognized it) as a tactic that, given the conditions he placed on the offer, was in no danger of being accepted.



I agree; now ... do you recognize yourself in this:

Do you find yourself, advocating income equality AND championing sacrificing the poor and working classes (i.e., "Let's go over the fiscal cliff!"; and/or, advocating income equality AND willing to sacrifice PoC, women, and the LGBT community (i.e., "Income Equality IS the most important issue of our time"; and/or, advocating a set of policy goals that begins with "IF" (and that "IF" involves a series of unlikely occurrences) AND criticizing Democratic policies (established in the current political environment), as inadequate; but, in their imperfection, do benefit the majority of the poor and working classes (i.e., the ACA, Executive Orders, etc.); and/or, spending the vast majority of your posts (especially during election season), criticizing Democrats, Democratic candidates, and "other" Democrats for supporting Democrats and/or Democratic candidates?

You know, so we can just keep it real and ensure that the words we are using mean something. Each of these positions have been struck by DU "progressives" (including by you); I offer that NONE of the above are progressive, nor do they fall within the mainstream of the Left, let alone the Democratic Party.