April Reign

Speak your mind even if your voice shakes

progressive bloggers

Once more with feeling

by

Psychols has a post today wondering if PB members are willing to put the progressive where their mouth is, so to speak.

I’ve been wondering the same thing.

PB membership is well over 300. I’ve posted about the petition to save the Community Access Program and currently sigs stand at 73. This is from a wide range of places.

So do people like to talk about progressive more than they like to act upon it?

Perhaps you need a reason to vote. Well if you are a social democratic (philosophy not party) you can go to the site and read about the success stories of various CAPS centers. Then vote so there can be more.

If you are a partisan of any party other than the conservatives you can consider it a vote against Harper.

If you are a partisan Liberal consider it a vote to save a Liberal program from the ravages of Harper government.

I’m putting my faith in you to act upon your progressive values and help save a low cost, extremely important program.

Website here

Petition here

Please pass this link on to all your contacts!

Lets build upon the momentum of success through perseverance that Verbena and liberal catnip have shown us.

Petition to reinstate My Blagh

by

on PB today Scott penned

The year is what the moderators agreed is the minimum time to let pass before hearing an appeal for reinstatement on his indefinite ban. It was agreed to by Wayne.

All further enquiries can and should be sent to Wayne if you dont agree with the moderators’ decision. He is the owner of this site and the final authority.

I believe coordinated efforts are always best therefore I have created a petition which will be sent on to Wayne Chu owner of Progressive Bloggers.

You can sign the petition here

and you can use this image on your site to link to the petition or link here

my blagh

The Big Tent is as the Big Tent Does

by

The Big TentIt would seem a weekly event the thread asking for definition of progressive, asking who would not fit under the big tent. No answer was ever forthcoming except that the owner and mods did not feel it their place to determine what people wrote on their blog.

Self definition of progressive then seemed to be the criteria for fitting under The Big Tent.

Blogging for F4J – acceptable, maligning female politicians [see numerous posts on Belinda Stronach]- acceptable, adhering sexist and politically derogatory labels to feminists [again see PB diaries around abortion,Elizabeth May]- acceptable, debating a womans’ right to choice [many blogs, tags-abortion,Elizabeth May]- acceptable, defaming a persons reputation and all who associate with him – acceptable.

Whether or not Roberts’ post was wrong has been discussed throughly, what I would like to know is how it was worse than any of the previous examples?

The Big Tent is either Big enough to handle and accept all sides of a controversy and to allow free speech OR it moderates views and speech.

If PB has decided on the latter will we soon be in receipt of a policy clearly defining the progressive views and values the mods and owner find acceptable?

A policy on what will be acceptable blog topics, words used, groups and/or persons that can be maligned freely?

It would seem echo chamber is in the eye of the beholder.