I'm aware of that. We shouldn't go along with it. "Progressive" is a euphamism. We should correct it every time it comes up. The American public is too ignorant of their own political history to put the term in any proper context.
There is a need for more than waiting around till the voters turn against government expansion(under democrats).
I heard on the John Bachelor show that Boehner is trying to create a new Contract with America--he delegated someone to figure out what it would include. Amazing they don't even know what they want to do.
There is a need for someone to articulate why the federal government should be getting out of running the states business. There is a need to call for cuts in spending.
The problem with this is that many of the states are already in financial trouble, and are dealing with cutting spending. One of the reasons state sovereignty hasn't worked is that the states continually fail on one score or another, and the feds jump in. Now, we have failure at ALL levels. The people say they want spending cuts until you get into specifics. Then they squawk.
I well understand the political pitfalls of proposing cutting spending. But it was that political compass that drove the GWB administration with Republican congress (the grand conservative experiment) to grow government in the first place (including home ownership) which ended very unhappy..And his talk radio conservative champians were willing to look the other way especially until GWB was safely re-elected.
One point should be articulated about democrats. They ran in 2006 and 2008 on the federal government funding state programs to lower state taxes. But in power they passed expensive mandates, and are proposing more. It is Arnold in CA that is ironically vocal about this.