Is the term ‘progressive Republican’ an oxymoron?

Yeah, and the GOP has been a big supporter of PBS also.

There were a lot of progressives in the Republican Party before about 1930 or 1940, but that’s ancient history. Since then Minnesota Republicans (starting with Stassen, who the old guard didn’t like) have probably been less conservative than national Republicans. But when the South took over with Gingrich et al, progressive Republicans became fossils, and there are hardly any of them left anywhere.

As a traditional conservative, which I guess in today’s terms means that I am socially liberal (less government, more liberty) and fiscally conservative (less government, more liberty), someone who has more in common with many democrats than some members of his own party, ie. those who strongly support a death penalty and strongly oppose abortion on the grounds that life must be preserved, or those whose religious beliefs disrupt their ability to imagine any policy not born out of it, I see myself as representing what you are calling progressive conservatism.
I think its kind of funny that you focus on the old republican as complaining about taxes and government, when for Lord’s sake, in the state of MN government has increased its size in gross dollars by an average of 20% a year since 1960. Now, being from South Dakota, where government could be a little bigger and provide better service to the people, I am not a less government all the time guy, but now as a resident of Minnesota I live amidst a blevy of Pie In The Sky Liberals who project their need for a parent onto the state, seemingly in order to prolong some type of adolescence, to avoid the peril’s of personal responsibility.
I believe in environmental responsibility and so I have more in common with democrats on most all issues regarding environmental protection.
I believe in a tax structure which rewards those who create employment for the less ambitious, content to collect a paycheck and benefits.
I believe in providing social welfare, but not because it actually helps people, rather because desperate people do desperate things and they usually do them to those who have lived responsibly.
I believe that people who eat Whoppers and suck down soda all day long ought to bear the responsibility for their bad health choices.
I also believe that our country can afford to provide a public college education for anyone willing to better themselves.
I do not believe that populism and pandering to the lowest common denominator of ability or knowledge is in our interest.
That’s what being a republican is about to me.

Really? I hope the ignorance in the this article is feigned for the sake of attention-grabbing.

First, to answer your lead question: No. Proof? See “Joe Lieberman” (http://www.instantrimshot.com).

Seriously, even if we concede that “religious hardliners and anti-tax crusaders” have been “dominating the party in recent years,” that in no way makes a “progressive Republican” an oxymoron. That makes him a minority.

Don’t those three you cite above — Carlson, Quie, Ramstad — prove that?

It’s good the anonymous GOP employee is anonymous. A social liberal because of wanting less government and more liberty? A liberal is not for less government–that’s GOP! Also, this GOP person opposes abortion because of the sanctity of life, but espouses a pro-death penalty stance immediately before that. Then, want to mix religion and politics? Then, the rest of the rant is spent on typical GOP rants–taxes. That ain’t progressive. And this person is very uninformed. South Dakota doesn’t have much is State taxes–and look at South Dakota. Close to the last in everything, especially standard of living. If the writer would like to research something he will find that the states with the higher taxes generally have the highest standard of living. Low taxes-low standard of living. He’s pure old fashioned GOP to me. It’s called I’ve got mine and screw you. Hardly a society that advvances everyone. The GOP is turning intot he party of the selfish and greedy and no one succeeds.

Well, what I was actually saying is:
That many otherwise republican voters are voting democrat because of the emphasis on philosophically contradictory moral views by some members of the republican party. So I was actually talking to two points that make republicans less electable.
I understand that those without an understanding of political history confuse the typical views of today as though they were always that way. And if you go back even further, sir or ma’am, to the mid 1800’s the original use of the term “liberal” is opposite that of today.
South Dakota, is to my mind suffering from being too right wing. Despite the relative lack in services there, they do send more kids to college per capita than the lavish schools of Minnesota do. And, SD is much more responsive to the tax base, at a state government level, with a strong bias of looking out for those who actually pay in.
If you believe that it is selfish to cause for the employment of another person, well you are backwards. If you think it is greedy to make a profit, you simply don’t understand how the world works.
I guess in parting, going back to the origination of the term Republic, back to Plato, centuries before Christ, a republic is a system of government where the wise rule for the less wise, and to me that is what a real republican stands for even today. Although clearly, in a democracy, where everyone has a vote, the chance that the less wise outnumber the wise has great historical precedent.

Pro choice = being for less government, a less restrictive government.

Support of gay marriage = being for less government, ie. it is not the government’s job to decide who marries who, and to create a new law to do it. (Plus marriage/long term pair bonding makes people more conservative, more responsible)

Support for decriminalisation of marijuana (our cops have better things to spend their time on) = being for less government involvement in the choices people make.

Being against prayer in public schools = that would be for less government, government less involved in the moral conditioning of people, government has no place in spending tax dollars to establish a particular religious tradition.

These are all so called liberal views, they are on the social side of life, but really they are conservative from the stand point of government involvement in people’s lives.
If you are modern day liberal and you need the government to be your parent and you want that parent to be permissive, that is coming to the same view by a different avenue.

Irrelevant. It’s not about Democrat/Republican it’s about being progressive or ‘afraid to change’ traditional. It tends to swap between parties. Back in Lincoln’s day the republicans were the progressive “liberal” party who pushed for equal rights for both white and colored people. Now days it’s the Democrats who are the progressive party who are pushing for equal rights for gays and straights. I feel bad for the people who have been Republican for their lifetime only to watch their party leave them in the dirt. However, I don’t feel sorry for those people who’s party has taken to this backwash and they refuse to leave it out of unfounded loyalty.

I’m a Progressive Republican
If you can have Conservative democrats
You can have progressive republicans

After All Teddy Roosevelt was a proud member of the Progressive Party

We have have a few nuts who have taken over our party …maybe we will wake up

I watched the Progressive Republicans on channel 2, today sponsered by G&L. Its 2:00 AM and I still can’t sleep. To watch the former governor tell me the globe is warming was fustrating. If he went outside this winter I think he would be surprised. Global warming conferences cancelled due to weather, for crying out loud, it snowed in Bagdad for the first time in recorded history!

The conference didn’t care about not making the base upset; the republican party lost the last two elections because the base was not supporting of the canidates. These Prog. Repub. are the problem. They dont stand by other republicans when they are in trouble, they dilute the party by not being proud of conserative ideas. They propigate the notion of “evil republicans” by saying “I’m not like that” or trying to fit in places they should not be.

Try being a prominate democrat and not be for choice.

The Progressive Republicans are nothing more than “me to Democrats” and the Republican party will lose until we get some leaders that are proud of who they are and the party they represent. It’s a shame to see this happen but I am through voting for politicians of this ilk. I would rather vote for a Democrat.

With this economy, bank crisis and crashing markets; we are $6.00 diesel away from true disater. We inflate our dollar and tax investment. I wonder what odds Vegas would put on the USA.

“To watch the former governor tell me the globe is warming was fustrating. If he went outside this winter I think he would be surprised. Global warming conferences cancelled due to weather, for crying out loud, it snowed in Bagdad for the first time in recorded history!”

Climate can shift in different areas of the world while global average temperatures still increase. That is a fact. The more these shifts happen the harder it is for farmers, for example.

“Eleven of the twelve years in the period (1995-2006) rank among the top 12 warmest years in the instrumental record (since 1850, towards the end of the Little Ice Age).”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fourth_Assessment_Report