Why don't Americans have Evangelicals shut up?

[damyanti]

Fair warning...serious RANT coming up!!!!!!

I used to love and admire American principles, or at least what I thought them to be. What happened to America? Most of the world never even heard of Evangelicals before, those of us that have, saw them as a small time loony rednecks...and yet in the last 8 years these loonies or at least imposers hypocritically calling upon their "values" to promote themselves have taken control of the entire country and by extension world politics.

Evangelicals, Talibans...there is no difference. Both groups are close minded, dismissive of facts and reality, war mongering violence proponents.

A reader left this comment on the newspaper site I like to frequent:

"Trust me when I tell you that Americans a) have absolutely no sense of humour about themselves or their country, b) do not realize how they are perceived in the rest of the world and c) although their country was founded by escapees from religious and political persecution they miss the irony that their government practices the very things that the founding fathers are against.
- Dawn, Toronto, Canada"

She nailed it to the point!


And another from the opposite side:

"I'm sorry, but you don't go to a party and insult the host. It is one thing for us to make fun of our own president, but it's another for a foreigner to do so on national television. He isn't a citizen, he isn't involved in the political process, and his comments were out of line. He is welcome to go home now- we don't need him here.
- Amanda, California, USA"

Why is it o.k. for Americans to insult other countries, to take self appointed prerogative to judge others, yet cant stand it themselves? I do agree with Amanda, it isn't fair or proper...it isn't fair or proper that Americans cant decide what kind of foreign policy they want. You are either part of the world community or you aren't...you cant have it both ways. You cant meddle into other peoples business, sometimes just for the heck of it, you cant effect our lives, often disastrously so - without anyone asking it of you - and then haughtily react to any criticism with a variation of "you have no say in our American matters".

The level of HYPOCRISY from the self appointed role model of democracy in the 21st century is astounding!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am not trying to be belligerent here (!), though I am sure, a lot of people will take it like that, because in post PATRIOT Act USA no one is allowed to question anything or they are labeled unpatriotic and terrorist sympathizers. That has been Republican (and whether you like it or not, Republican and Evangelical loonies have become synonyms) defense every time they lost the argument based on reason, facts and even faith.

And what precisely is that I don't understand?

Its nice that you are patriotic...but how can you expect the world to take you seriously when you open your argument in any and every single debate with words "America is the greatest country in the world"? It isn't (!) - and yes, unlike you I can provide facts that are not abstract - but thats beside the point, there is a time and place for such sentiment, a political conversation isn't such time. You use that as your foreign policy doctrine and wonder why the rest of the World (even those who officially back you up) find you in such distaste?

We find the issues on which you judge your political candidates moronic. Values! What values?

Where does the Republicans have them and Democrats don't stand comes from? I wish all Democrats had the balls of Bill Clinton! Yes, he cheated on his wife; yes, he couldn't keep it in his pants. You know what, as far as political crimes go - if I were the mother who lost her son in Iraq,...I could live with BC getting a bj, but how this women go on every day living their lives with Bush still as president,...I cant express how much I admire them, they deserve to know the truth, they deserve respect and gratitude...and yet, the great American patriots resent them, they cant look them in the eyes, they practically spit in their faces. Bush lied and lied and lied, and he fuc*ed one thing after another...that is when he wasn't on vacation,... Clinton had a stress relieving orgasm while working, - its clear which is a private matter between husband and wife, and which is the impeachment worthy cause, no?

George Bush and Dick Cheney? Dick Cheney is pure evil. And George Bush? My God, if it weren't so tragic, it would have been the most hilarious joke ever.

The one person with whom Bush has the most things in common is Osama bin Laden. Both are useless waste of space, they think world owes them something just by being born, both think they are great, they are spoiled, rich, both insecure sociopaths suffering from "daddy inferiority complex", both with no regard for human life.

Apparently, you elected Bush for second term because you didn't want to change commander in chief during war time? The most disgusting argument I hear Republicans make again and again is...if you don't support the mission, you don't support the troops! How does that not make you angry? Isn't the right to question...to oversee your political leadership the most basic of American rights? Isn't the most basic right of every parent to know that their child hasn't been sent to death as a capricious act of a petty, little man? Isn't the right of every American to know that their budget and military resources aren't being abused for selfish goals of filthy rich elitist minority?

Why don't lies like that make you indignant enough to make sure you don't elect another one again? And yet, according to news reports, a great number of Americans is getting ready to vote for another Bush in skirt? Not much is known about Mrs. Palin, and yet what is known is enough to raise red flags.

Plain spoken? Ha, if you payed attention, anyone who knows her uses one common adjective to describe her - calculating.

Principled? Please, she changes wind as often as McCain.

Guts? Yes, it takes great guts to kill an innocent animal and then stand next to its bloodied corps, with your toddler, smiling and have your picture taken. Personally, it reminds me of pictures from Abu Ghraib, it shows propensity to pointless cruelty.

She is woman? Is she? So why does she behave like a man? If History teaches us anything, its that female conservative politicians do nothing for promotion of female equality, but harm it.

She is a mother of Down Syndrome baby? So what? Does that make her automatically compassionate? How much time is she spending with that particular child when there are no cameras rolling, can she even stand to look at him, I wonder? I applaud her stand that she has a right to career, and that that gives no one the right to judge her as a mother and a wife...thing is, I don't think she actually believes that she is being discriminated against, its just a standard hate speech...what I do find abhorrent is the way she drags that poor baby on every stage she is on, allows TV lights to be pushed into his face and strangers to touch and hand him down among the crowd...

I don't know whose decision it was that her 17 year old daughter give birth, but I would bet you anything that she forced, if not her daughter, then definitely her "slacker" boyfriend to marry for the sake of her political career.

I watched her interview...they show her a tape where she clearly said one thing...now, if she had said to the journalist "thats not what I have meant" or "you have taken out of context", but she actually said "thats not what I said, what I said is...". Such lying expertise, clearly she is ready to be the president.

Another thing I don't understand is...why do Americans hate intelligent people so much? What is so wrong about wanting life to be good for all people, and not just rich?

McCain spent his entire political career playing the PR game perfectly, changing things he stands for based on what was the most likely to get him elected, (and often doing the opposite behind closed doors). He callously left his crippled wife for rich beauty queen, whose father had money and connections to back him up. He is so rich, he has no idea how many houses he has (a silly point, perhaps, but very demonstrative).
Obama rose through life based on his own merits. If nothing else, He is an example to kids that education is the key and the way to success. He married the woman he fell in love with. He is an upstanding member of his community and an example of moral values and family life.
And yet, hilariously, he is seen as elitist and crazy liberal...while McCain who is divorced, opportunist and who cheated on his wife and the only thing of which he is an upstanding member is his "country club" is seen as "a man of the people". Explain that to me, because I just don't get it.

Evangelicals sore point are gays...its easier to unite people by common hate than it is by friendship...and yet, all the time you hear about one or the other prominent "gay hater" being exposed as homosexual. Then they go to some "brain washing" camp and claim to come back cured...and you buy that?

I fully support the right of every single group to have their own values and rules. Any church can refuse to to marry gays in the religious ceremony in their own church...but what sickens me is when they try to make their own values into the law and force others, by violent means, to adhere to their beliefs. Thats the kind of people I label as loonies and I find it hard to believe that anyone takes them seriously. What ever happened to separation of church and state? Denying them the religious ceremony of certain faith is one thing, but state registration...thats discrimination. Why the fear, are you so insecure with your own set of values?

Anti-abortion? Fine, campaign all you want, speak your mind, educate people to your way of thinking...but them trying to set up Supreme Court so as to overturn the decision to make it illegal...how dare they, who gives them the right to decide what other people do with their own bodies? I don't give a damn about the debate if the fetus is a living being or not...if something is growing inside of me, its my decision.

Creationist theory? What century do these people live in? Its utterly absurd that that is the relevant issue in the election campaign for president of 21st century superpower. You want to teach it as the only truth, fine...do it in Religion class or Sunday school. But School and Biology class is about science!
And school (Christian) prayer, in multicultural schools attended by children from different faiths is despicable.

Abstinence? It fuc*ing doesn't work. Bristol Palin...shes a "raised according to Bush teenager"...I rest my case. I wish Americans stopped being such ninnies when it comes to sex and used some reason and compassion when educating their children.

The amount of personal and individual freedoms Americans gave up meekly as sheep, under the pretext of national security...but which, if anything, gave you less security and enabled Bush and his cronies to use and abuse you, is really just sad. Why do you take that? Land of the brave, land of the good? It seems to me that the only thing "good guys" have been doing lately is taking it in the rear (usually, given to them by anti-gay evangelicals, lol).

What happened to ideas of honor and personal responsibility? They do stupid and evil things, they are exposed...and yet, nothing happens to them. They get promoted.

Isn't the basic Republican value small government that takes care of big government jobs and stays out of peoples private business? And yet, they have taken that upside down and none of you even blinked...they have ruined economy, their state decisions are as wise as if they were written by a drunk, they contracted jobs that only government can do to their privateer friends who made a lot of money and did a lousy job, but they want to govern every single aspect of your private lives...and you have no beef with that?

Every person has a right to decent medical care and should have an access to it.

No politician should ever be able to say or behave in a way that suggests that he owes no accountability to people who elected him and that it is unpatriotic to question him, and get away with it.

People who have trouble reading simple sentences shouldn't be allowed to make economy policies. To me, economy is one of the most important government issues, and yet they behave so laconically about it. It is a serious matter of which they are ignorant about, and instead of placing responsible and qualified people to handle it...they play with it, and in return with our lives. But what do they care, whats one house to John McCain?

War. To most Americans its an abstract idea, something that happens in lands far, far away. The closest Bush ever came to it is a game of paint ball. You have no respect for human life, unless its American...and even then, only if we are talking about a nice, Christian, middle class...everyone else...

I am not against all war...perhaps naively, I still believe that there are things worth fighting for. But whatever reason Bush and Cheney had for instigating this war their reasons were neither altruistic nor in the service of American people. And yet you still protect him!

Following American presidential race...its like watching a car crash.

[1rugby]

Why don't Americans have Evangelicals shut up? I wish we could shut them up...and yes I agree with the statement, " But it goes toward free speach. They dont speak for many of us and not for me. Most dont have a any way to get our message out. Dont believe the media either, I dont...
Following American presidential race...its like watching a car crash." Its always the lessor of evils.
But its how the system works...Freedom isnt free or cheap....

[Ragoczy]

Nice that all 300,000,000+ of us fit so nicely into your little stereotype, isn't it? Glad we could be of help.

[Sea_Hunter]

You have raised several good points about Americans. No, sadly we do lack a sense of humor about our country, and you are quite right, about many things we show a very two sided face about. But, that's the wonder of America in a good way.
Not so long ago the Dutch printed cartoons that showed Mohamad. The Islamic world went nutz, rioted, and threatened death to all. Let us use that as a scale of intolerance. If that death to all rates a ten, then the Evangelicals in America hardly rate a three.
No, they do not like gays, abortion, non-"christians" (note the word christian in quotes) and I suspect even themselves too much. They take "Holyer than thow" to all new extreams. They thump the bible, slam the bible, thrust it in your face, and havn't figured out yet that the bible they are thumping, slaming, and thrusting was written by an English King named James. How an English King became the final authority on God is not a question any of them seem able to answere.
But, so what? So they offend anyone who asks a question, or has a mind. So what? I can only be offended by stupidity if I allow it. The best way to deal with their behavior is with a sad shake of the head. Now if they start blowing up colleges, or quickie marts, then perhaps action should be taken. Until then, lets allow freedom of speach keep it place in America.
Given the choice to silence stupidity and give up freedom of speach, or let the idiots rave like lunitics howling at the moon, I'll let the idiots howl.
No, America is not loved, nor is it likely to be no matter who is elected. We are far to brash and loud. We have incredible power. We are free. Ok, so the rest of the world hates us. I don't live in terror because of it, I just wish at least one of our politicans would get us the hell out of the UN. Is America likely to change? I suspect the rest of the world hopes it does not. For all of our faults, and we have many, America remains the last best hope for more than half the worlds people. They do everything they can to come here, to live here, to enjoy the freedoms that we do have.
So, yes, all that you said is so right. All the points you made so good. I mean that. But when the final tally is made, freedoms that we still have somehow outweigh the bad. The strident voices of evangelicals are overcome by the reason of free minds in a free society. We are not Voltares best of all worlds. But compaired to the rest of the world, we are better than most. We are not the shining light on the mountain top, at best we are a campfire on a hill. But still, that faint light in a world so darkened by intolerance is a light of hope.
So, lets let the evangelicals screach. Let us try to rise above the level of offence taken. And above all, let us both, your country and mine, keep freedom of speach more sacred to us, than a bible written by an English King is sacred to them.
Hunter.

[damyanti]

Why don't Americans have Evangelicals shut up? I wish we could shut them up...and yes I agree with the statement, " But it goes toward free speach. They dont speak for many of us and not for me. Most dont have a any way to get our message out. Dont believe the media either, I dont...
Following American presidential race...its like watching a car crash." Its always the lessor of evils.
But its how the system works...Freedom isnt free or cheap....

I don't believe everything the media says...but a lot of it grates and I was just venting out. :)

As for freedom of the speech...I do agree, but it does exasperates and makes one weary that we are the only ones who respect it. If they respected it...I have no problem with their belief system or even the fact that they are hypocritical about it...what disgusts and worries me is how they are allowed to go on with their political motto "you either agree with us or you are a terrorist" and Americans, once great defenders of Liberty, take it meekly.

[damyanti]

Nice that all 300,000,000+ of us fit so nicely into your little stereotype, isn't it? Glad we could be of help.

See how the rest of the world feels, when you do it all the time?

And your help is greatly appreciated. :) :blurp_ani

[Ragoczy]

See how the rest of the world feels, when you do it all the time?

And your help is greatly appreciated. :) :blurp_ani

Again -- all Americans do it all the time? Very nice.

[damyanti]

But, so what? So they offend anyone who asks a question, or has a mind. So what? I can only be offended by stupidity if I allow it. The best way to deal with their behavior is with a sad shake of the head.

So what? That is precisely my beef! Why don't the rest of you use your freedom of speech and say loud and clear - you do not speak for all of us and you do not represent American values?

So what? I think tens of thousands of dead Iraqis, crippled children, thousands of soldiers who were scared by war, every person who has to pay atrocious amounts of money for gas, families who lost their homes and jobs because of catastrophic economical policy, every times my life is arbitrarily affected by a man whom I haven't elected to power....would object to your laconic way of letting them go about their business.

Evil prospers when good men do nothing.




No, America is not loved, nor is it likely to be no matter who is elected. We are far to brash and loud. We have incredible power. We are free. Ok, so the rest of the world hates us. I don't live in terror because of it, I just wish at least one of our politicans would get us the hell out of the UN. Is America likely to change? I suspect the rest of the world hopes it does not. For all of our faults, and we have many, America remains the last best hope for more than half the worlds people. They do everything they can to come here, to live here, to enjoy the freedoms that we do have.


That is the biggest delusion you Americans have! The only thing that made your greatness great was your military ability and your advance scientific researches. Your politicians love "hard on crime" campaigns, apparently Bush's was "hard on science". And the only thing your are capable blowing up these days is too rude to say, lol. Europe has culture and diplomatic "power horses" like Merkel and even, Sarkozy. Russians and Indians are the New World billionaires. Australia is the new "land of the opportunity". Land of personal liberties has become a dictatorship, in all but name, and Canada is the new "land of the free" and a shining beacon of democracy.

It bothers us when Americans think that the World revolves around them and don't recognize that America is a part of the World.




But when the final tally is made, freedoms that we still have somehow outweigh the bad. The strident voices of evangelicals are overcome by the reason of free minds in a free society. We are not Voltares best of all worlds. But compaired to the rest of the world, we are better than most.

Perhaps, arguably, freedoms that you have left; but allow McCain and Palin to be elected and we will see, with your attitude, how many of those that have barely survived this long, will still be here in another 8 years. USA these days is seen as little more than dictatorship. And if your argument that you are better is comparison with Islamic Fundamentalists...how low the criteria has gotten.

"we are better than most", where do you people come up with such pretensions...no, you are not better than most, sorry to burst your bubble...but you are worse then most. You are better than some.

[amosse85]

Let me preface this by saying I didn't read your whole rant. While pink is my favorite color in certain contexts, it's not a good choice for the text of an essay.

Like Ragoczy pointed out, please don't attempt to characterize some 300 million very different people as a single entity. The US has some states the size of independent countries; referring to all Americans as one is like grouping the English and the French as "Europeans."

Yes, evangelicals are a stain on society. Unfortunately, they're a very local minority, driven by fear and faith, and many hold positions of power. These are people who have exploited a noble system of government for their own gain, and have dug in to a point where nothing short of bloodshed can dislodge them. I realize this sounds extreme, but it's reality. At the root of the problem is religion; attacking one's beliefs, no matter how incredible, serves only to strengthen the holder's resolve.

[damyanti]

Like Ragoczy pointed out, please don't attempt to characterize some 300 million very different people as a single entity. The US has some states the size of independent countries; referring to all Americans as one is like grouping the English and the French as "Europeans."


Yes, this is the second time I have been accused of that (as if any reasonable person would do that, and I did point out it was a rant)..........and the whole point of my rant was...why aren't the Americans, majority who aren't like that, raise their voice against such extremists? Instead the majority sit meekly, in a mousy voice they say "oh, they have a right to their free speech". Sure they do, but again, my point has been - why do good people not speak up too, and speak up resolutely? Yes, Evangelicals have a right to their beliefs....and I haven't attacked those beliefs, I have quite clearly stated that they are entitled to them, ...what I did attack is their "mission" to turn those beliefs into law (and a lot of it, they already have) and the compliancy of the rest of you.

And why am I ranting...because if the rest of you don't speak up and speak up resolutely...it is a very realistic possibility that one day, not so far into the future, President Palin might blink while applying lipstick and nuke half of my hemisphere away, because voices in her head told her to do so.:rolleyes:
It is a very realistic possibility.

And it would also be nice if Americans stopped to moan that "the world hates Americans"....because we don't, (we LOVE Clinton), what we do hate is the bigotry of your politics, condescending attitude and (delusional) superiority complex....sorry to shock you, but most of the world does not want to move to USA. And if you are biting your tongue to tell me not to meddle into your private matters...tough,...because believe me I wish I could (like I can and do with politics of almost every other country), ....but you yourself have made it (your internal politics) the matter of world importance.

And contrary to your self righteous attitude...no body ever asked you to play the world cop....and you have never, not once, done it out of altruistic motives, there was always something in it for you...because when there isn't, you are quite happy to let "those who are not as great as you" to kill among themselves.

[amosse85]

And contrary to your self righteous attitude...no body ever asked you to play the world cop....and you have never, not once, done it out of altruistic motives

Name a country which has.

[IAmCanadian]

And why am I ranting...because if the rest of you don't speak up and speak up resolutely...it is a very realistic possibility that one day, not so far into the future, President Palin might blink while applying lipstick and nuke half of my hemisphere away, because voices in her head told her to do so.:rolleyes:
It is a very realistic possibility.

In your profile it says you like intelligent debates, however you're providing substantial evidence to the contrary with remarks like these. I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric. I am not seeing an enumeration of the policies that someone like Palin might implement to such negative effect- or a detailed explanation of how the system of checks and balances (and most importantly, lobbyists) would break down to allow her to go to war on religious grounds. You know, the sorts of things that people typically refer to when making an informed argument.

Perhaps you should look inward for an explanation regarding the perceived lack of opposition to evangelical influence. Perhaps the looming spectre of a church and state merger is a skewed perspective on your part, and other people are able to realize that there really is compariatively little cause for alarm and that expression of religious beliefs is not something that the majority of Americans are interested in curtailing. This problem exists largely in your own mind.


And it would also be nice if Americans stopped to moan that "the world hates Americans"....because we don't, (we LOVE Clinton), what we do hate is the bigotry of your politics, condescending attitude and (delusional) superiority complex....sorry to shock you, but most of the world does not want to move to USA. And if you are biting your tongue to tell me not to meddle into your private matters...tough,...because believe me I wish I could (like I can and do with politics of almost every other country), ....but you yourself have made it (your internal politics) the matter of world importance.

Have you ever been to either of the coasts, or do you just talk to people from Texas? I really think you need to just go back through your post and change every instance of "American" to "Neo-conservative American". Even that is a massive generalization on my part. I apologize to any and all Texans.


And contrary to your self righteous attitude...no body ever asked you to play the world cop....and you have never, not once, done it out of altruistic motives, there was always something in it for you...because when there isn't, you are quite happy to let "those who are not as great as you" to kill among themselves.

I'd like you to point out one example of any country in the history of the world intervening on behalf of another for purely altruistic reasons. That's right. You have the entirety of human history to choose from. Go nuts. If you can show one example of a projection of military power that was not done to show support for an existing ally (and maintain a lucrative trading partnership), for the hope of attaining new land and resources, or in defense of a preferred ethnicity or type of government, I will personally send you $100.

EDIT: Some examples of massive generalizations and flat-out incorrect statements that would get you laughed out of the building if they showed up unsupported in any academic paper:

"In post PATRIOT Act USA no one is allowed to question anything or they are labeled unpatriotic and terrorist sympathizers." (Not even close to true.)
"How can you expect the world to take you seriously when you open your argument in any and every single debate with words "America is the greatest country in the world?...You use that as your foreign policy doctrine..." (Breathtakingly simplistic view of the problems with U.S. foreign policy.)
"The one person with whom Bush has the most things in common is Osama bin Laden. Both are useless waste of space, they think world owes them something just by being born, both think they are great, they are spoiled, rich, both insecure sociopaths suffering from "daddy inferiority complex", both with no regard for human life." (Massive intellectual dishonesty and lack of explanation for assertions.)
"She is woman? Is she? So why does she behave like a man?" (No examples to attempt to prove this statement. You're doing your own sex no favors here.)

I can't actually even come close to getting them all. Not even close. But this one angers me.

"But School and Biology class is about science!" (You crusade for science and yet your post is filled with oversimplified, unsourced, unsupported GARBAGE that would make any scientist cringe. Your post is not a fair-minded view, does nothing to prove any assertions. It is one of the most one-sided intellectually dishonest rants I have read in a long time. I'm a liberal and I'm ashamed that other liberals exist who actually think this sort of thing has any merit whatsoever. This rant actually depresses me. The bottom line is that if you took this to any forum where REAL political problems were trying to be solved, it would do no good. It is biased, simplistic, makes generalizations constantly and shows a very limited view of the scope of American politics and society.)

And to think, I came to this forum to talk about fucking. It feels silly to go on about this when my avatar photo is two sluts bobbing for used condoms.

- FS

[mkemse]

Fair warning...serious RANT coming up!!!!!!

I used to love and admire American principles, or at least what I thought them to be. What happened to America? Most of the world never even heard of Evangelicals before, those of us that have, saw them as a small time loony rednecks...and yet in the last 8 years these loonies or at least imposers hypocritically calling upon their "values" to promote themselves have taken control of the entire country and by extension world politics.

Evangelicals, Talibans...there is no difference. Both groups are close minded, dismissive of facts and reality, war mongering violence proponents.

A reader left this comment on the newspaper site I like to frequent:

"Trust me when I tell you that Americans a) have absolutely no sense of humour about themselves or their country, b) do not realize how they are perceived in the rest of the world and c) although their country was founded by escapees from religious and political persecution they miss the irony that their government practices the very things that the founding fathers are against.
- Dawn, Toronto, Canada"

She nailed it to the point!


And another from the opposite side:

"I'm sorry, but you don't go to a party and insult the host. It is one thing for us to make fun of our own president, but it's another for a foreigner to do so on national television. He isn't a citizen, he isn't involved in the political process, and his comments were out of line. He is welcome to go home now- we don't need him here.
- Amanda, California, USA"

Why is it o.k. for Americans to insult other countries, to take self appointed prerogative to judge others, yet cant stand it themselves? I do agree with Amanda, it isn't fair or proper...it isn't fair or proper that Americans cant decide what kind of foreign policy they want. You are either part of the world community or you aren't...you cant have it both ways. You cant meddle into other peoples business, sometimes just for the heck of it, you cant effect our lives, often disastrously so - without anyone asking it of you - and then haughtily react to any criticism with a variation of "you have no say in our American matters".

The level of HYPOCRISY from the self appointed role model of democracy in the 21st century is astounding!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am not trying to be belligerent here (!), though I am sure, a lot of people will take it like that, because in post PATRIOT Act USA no one is allowed to question anything or they are labeled unpatriotic and terrorist sympathizers. That has been Republican (and whether you like it or not, Republican and Evangelical loonies have become synonyms) defense every time they lost the argument based on reason, facts and even faith.

And what precisely is that I don't understand?

Its nice that you are patriotic...but how can you expect the world to take you seriously when you open your argument in any and every single debate with words "America is the greatest country in the world"? It isn't (!) - and yes, unlike you I can provide facts that are not abstract - but thats beside the point, there is a time and place for such sentiment, a political conversation isn't such time. You use that as your foreign policy doctrine and wonder why the rest of the World (even those who officially back you up) find you in such distaste?

We find the issues on which you judge your political candidates moronic. Values! What values?

Where does the Republicans have them and Democrats don't stand comes from? I wish all Democrats had the balls of Bill Clinton! Yes, he cheated on his wife; yes, he couldn't keep it in his pants. You know what, as far as political crimes go - if I were the mother who lost her son in Iraq,...I could live with BC getting a bj, but how this women go on every day living their lives with Bush still as president,...I cant express how much I admire them, they deserve to know the truth, they deserve respect and gratitude...and yet, the great American patriots resent them, they cant look them in the eyes, they practically spit in their faces. Bush lied and lied and lied, and he fuc*ed one thing after another...that is when he wasn't on vacation,... Clinton had a stress relieving orgasm while working, - its clear which is a private matter between husband and wife, and which is the impeachment worthy cause, no?

George Bush and Dick Cheney? Dick Cheney is pure evil. And George Bush? My God, if it weren't so tragic, it would have been the most hilarious joke ever.

The one person with whom Bush has the most things in common is Osama bin Laden. Both are useless waste of space, they think world owes them something just by being born, both think they are great, they are spoiled, rich, both insecure sociopaths suffering from "daddy inferiority complex", both with no regard for human life.

Apparently, you elected Bush for second term because you didn't want to change commander in chief during war time? The most disgusting argument I hear Republicans make again and again is...if you don't support the mission, you don't support the troops! How does that not make you angry? Isn't the right to question...to oversee your political leadership the most basic of American rights? Isn't the most basic right of every parent to know that their child hasn't been sent to death as a capricious act of a petty, little man? Isn't the right of every American to know that their budget and military resources aren't being abused for selfish goals of filthy rich elitist minority?

Why don't lies like that make you indignant enough to make sure you don't elect another one again? And yet, according to news reports, a great number of Americans is getting ready to vote for another Bush in skirt? Not much is known about Mrs. Palin, and yet what is known is enough to raise red flags.

Plain spoken? Ha, if you payed attention, anyone who knows her uses one common adjective to describe her - calculating.

Principled? Please, she changes wind as often as McCain.

Guts? Yes, it takes great guts to kill an innocent animal and then stand next to its bloodied corps, with your toddler, smiling and have your picture taken. Personally, it reminds me of pictures from Abu Ghraib, it shows propensity to pointless cruelty.

She is woman? Is she? So why does she behave like a man? If History teaches us anything, its that female conservative politicians do nothing for promotion of female equality, but harm it.

She is a mother of Down Syndrome baby? So what? Does that make her automatically compassionate? How much time is she spending with that particular child when there are no cameras rolling, can she even stand to look at him, I wonder? I applaud her stand that she has a right to career, and that that gives no one the right to judge her as a mother and a wife...thing is, I don't think she actually believes that she is being discriminated against, its just a standard hate speech...what I do find abhorrent is the way she drags that poor baby on every stage she is on, allows TV lights to be pushed into his face and strangers to touch and hand him down among the crowd...

I don't know whose decision it was that her 17 year old daughter give birth, but I would bet you anything that she forced, if not her daughter, then definitely her "slacker" boyfriend to marry for the sake of her political career.

I watched her interview...they show her a tape where she clearly said one thing...now, if she had said to the journalist "thats not what I have meant" or "you have taken out of context", but she actually said "thats not what I said, what I said is...". Such lying expertise, clearly she is ready to be the president.

Another thing I don't understand is...why do Americans hate intelligent people so much? What is so wrong about wanting life to be good for all people, and not just rich?

McCain spent his entire political career playing the PR game perfectly, changing things he stands for based on what was the most likely to get him elected, (and often doing the opposite behind closed doors). He callously left his crippled wife for rich beauty queen, whose father had money and connections to back him up. He is so rich, he has no idea how many houses he has (a silly point, perhaps, but very demonstrative).
Obama rose through life based on his own merits. If nothing else, He is an example to kids that education is the key and the way to success. He married the woman he fell in love with. He is an upstanding member of his community and an example of moral values and family life.
And yet, hilariously, he is seen as elitist and crazy liberal...while McCain who is divorced, opportunist and who cheated on his wife and the only thing of which he is an upstanding member is his "country club" is seen as "a man of the people". Explain that to me, because I just don't get it.

Evangelicals sore point are gays...its easier to unite people by common hate than it is by friendship...and yet, all the time you hear about one or the other prominent "gay hater" being exposed as homosexual. Then they go to some "brain washing" camp and claim to come back cured...and you buy that?

I fully support the right of every single group to have their own values and rules. Any church can refuse to to marry gays in the religious ceremony in their own church...but what sickens me is when they try to make their own values into the law and force others, by violent means, to adhere to their beliefs. Thats the kind of people I label as loonies and I find it hard to believe that anyone takes them seriously. What ever happened to separation of church and state? Denying them the religious ceremony of certain faith is one thing, but state registration...thats discrimination. Why the fear, are you so insecure with your own set of values?

Anti-abortion? Fine, campaign all you want, speak your mind, educate people to your way of thinking...but them trying to set up Supreme Court so as to overturn the decision to make it illegal...how dare they, who gives them the right to decide what other people do with their own bodies? I don't give a damn about the debate if the fetus is a living being or not...if something is growing inside of me, its my decision.

Creationist theory? What century do these people live in? Its utterly absurd that that is the relevant issue in the election campaign for president of 21st century superpower. You want to teach it as the only truth, fine...do it in Religion class or Sunday school. But School and Biology class is about science!
And school (Christian) prayer, in multicultural schools attended by children from different faiths is despicable.

Abstinence? It fuc*ing doesn't work. Bristol Palin...shes a "raised according to Bush teenager"...I rest my case. I wish Americans stopped being such ninnies when it comes to sex and used some reason and compassion when educating their children.

The amount of personal and individual freedoms Americans gave up meekly as sheep, under the pretext of national security...but which, if anything, gave you less security and enabled Bush and his cronies to use and abuse you, is really just sad. Why do you take that? Land of the brave, land of the good? It seems to me that the only thing "good guys" have been doing lately is taking it in the rear (usually, given to them by anti-gay evangelicals, lol).

What happened to ideas of honor and personal responsibility? They do stupid and evil things, they are exposed...and yet, nothing happens to them. They get promoted.

Isn't the basic Republican value small government that takes care of big government jobs and stays out of peoples private business? And yet, they have taken that upside down and none of you even blinked...they have ruined economy, their state decisions are as wise as if they were written by a drunk, they contracted jobs that only government can do to their privateer friends who made a lot of money and did a lousy job, but they want to govern every single aspect of your private lives...and you have no beef with that?

Every person has a right to decent medical care and should have an access to it.

No politician should ever be able to say or behave in a way that suggests that he owes no accountability to people who elected him and that it is unpatriotic to question him, and get away with it.

People who have trouble reading simple sentences shouldn't be allowed to make economy policies. To me, economy is one of the most important government issues, and yet they behave so laconically about it. It is a serious matter of which they are ignorant about, and instead of placing responsible and qualified people to handle it...they play with it, and in return with our lives. But what do they care, whats one house to John McCain?

War. To most Americans its an abstract idea, something that happens in lands far, far away. The closest Bush ever came to it is a game of paint ball. You have no respect for human life, unless its American...and even then, only if we are talking about a nice, Christian, middle class...everyone else...

I am not against all war...perhaps naively, I still believe that there are things worth fighting for. But whatever reason Bush and Cheney had for instigating this war their reasons were neither altruistic nor in the service of American people. And yet you still protect him!

Following American presidential race...its like watching a car crash.


Someone PLEASE cprrect me if I am wrong on this, but the main reason Bush was relelcted is that never in the Hsitry of the United States as I understand it, has ANY incumbent President been voted out of Office while we were at WAr,

Also sme may say LBJ, the reality of that. he was not voted out, he refused to run a 2nd time

My guessis that Bush was re elcted becuase we never vote out a Prsiedtn while we are at war, again please correct me if i am wrong about this

[damyanti]

Name a country which has.

Your point being what? Every other country minds their own business, there is no other country in the world that would have been given such leeway when invading the other country, no other country wears the self appointed epithet of "world cop".

My point isn't that America isn't great or that a lot of that has come out of isnt good.....but what would you make of your friend if he one day came to your house and claimed "I am greater than, your values suck, and I am making my word the law in your house"...my point is that it is terribly conceited and narrow minded of you to claim "we are the greatest". If a Dom came to the chat and said "I am the greatest Dom", how would you react...and you have to state it, all the time (and yes, that is something 99% of you do)....even in liberal medium, because thats what those loonies have reduced you to...even the most serious intellectuals feel they have to do it every time they debate something, lest they be accused of being unpatriotic, not supporting the troops...

Unlike most of you, I do know what those troops are going through and the situations they face...so how come, wanting them to stay alive and not die in vain makes me their enemy...while you feel no indignations towards people who have sent them to die so laconically?

I am not trying to be hostile, I am sorry if thats how it comes across...but I wont apologies for caring. Things like that used to matter, things like integrity and personal accountability....what Nixon did seems like child play compared to what Bush did...and yet, those who seek to continue his policies have a 50% chance of winning the election.....it fills me with wonder. Are human beings ever going to learn to talk things out, to live their own lives and let others do the same without trying to change them into their own image? Will the message of piece ever be as sexy and news appealing as a gun loving chick in heels?

[damyanti]

[QUOTE=Flesh Seraph;713383]In your profile it says you like intelligent debates, however you're providing substantial evidence to the contrary with remarks like these. I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric. I am not seeing an enumeration of the policies that someone like Palin might implement to such negative effect- or a detailed explanation of how the system of checks and balances (and most importantly, lobbyists) would break down to allow her to go to war on religious grounds. You know, the sorts of things that people typically refer to when making an informed argument.

You say that seriously with the self evident state of American policies today? Checks and balances? Hmmm, I must have skipped the part when Congress voted to go to war...that little bit is in the Constitution, isn't it and yet Bush has been able to skip it...I rest my case.

Palin said that she is ready to go to war with Russia without blinking! Bush clearly and proudly said in an interview that he went to war in Iraq with the blessings from God. Yes, I have nothing to worry about.

All I am doing is rhetoric? Is that supposed to be in an insult?

rhetoric - the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a: the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion.

I understand how that might be a shock to you after years of wonderful Bushisms.

[IAmCanadian]

You say that seriously with the self evident state of American policies today? Checks and balances? Hmmm, I must have skipped the part when Congress voted to go to war.

Touche. But I think we both know that that war wasn't declared on religious grounds. It definitely represents a failure, but the U.S.A would never accept religious justification for any major conflict, not in this day and age.

In any case, my above post uses inflammatory language and may not be in line with the forum guidelines. So if you're currently in the process of calling me a dick, I guess I don't blame you. The rhetoric thing wasn't an insult- it was meant to point out that you use persuasive, hyperbole-laden statements to sway reader opinion instead of making a well-reasoned, lengthier argument.

- FS

[mkemse]

Deep inside, I realy feel me the War in Iraq was started so that George Bush Jr. could finish the job with Sadaam that his father was not able to complete

[DowntownAmber]

Hopping in to say I love your signature, damyanti: "The deepest rivers flow with the least sound."

It's very thoughtful.

[damyanti]

Touche. But I think we both know that that war wasn't declared on religious grounds. It definitely represents a failure, but the U.S.A would never accept religious justification for any major conflict, not in this day and age.

In any case, my above post uses inflammatory language and may not be in line with the forum guidelines. So if you're currently in the process of calling me a dick, I guess I don't blame you. The rhetoric thing wasn't an insult- it was meant to point out that you use persuasive, hyperbole-laden statements to sway reader opinion instead of making a well-reasoned, lengthier argument.

- FS

No, not officially they wouldn't - but the major point in the election campaign is how religiously devout they are. Vice presidential candidate stood in the church and said that American troops are in Iraq "on the mission from God". Do I think she really believes that, whether she does or not, its equally wrong. No one called her out on it; even when she point blank lied that she didn't say that. She is smart and she has no qualms about using such rhetoric to win the election. Why is one of the main election questions "creationist theory"? Christian extremists represent the core voting body of Republican party. And one major point advantage they have against Democrats - they yell foul all the time, and if there is no foul, they make something up. And they are constantly allowed to get away with it. And that has been my point - why, if they are such a minority, are they allowed to be so loud, louder than anyone else and to tailor the national laws and politics according to their religious beliefs?

I disagree with your assessment of my speech, but I am rather subjective in that matter, lol, and I do give you the benefit of the doubt. Even if you are right, 1) thats how politicians (especially republican) speek; wasn't Palins introductory speech all rhetoric and false innuendos, - sometimes the only way to win is to fight fire with fire; 2) it doesn't change the fact that reasoned arguments and hard facts to back up my claims exist, but when was the last time facts mattered to Evangelicals (am I again making a generalization, do I really believe that all are evil war lovers, - no of course not, some actually live their faith in accordance to Christ and with respect to other people. But I have no proof of that, my belief in their existence is based on faith, because they never speak up!)...and as I stated I was venting out my frustrations not writing a thesis.

p.s. No, I didn't call you a "dick", and it didn't even occur to me to call the mods - thats the freedom of speech. :) I think someone here likened me to Voltaire (?) and what do you know his is one of my all time favorite quotes ..."I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

But what did cross my mind, was to ask you whether you ever worked for Karl Rowe, :blurp_ani. It wasn't nice of you to suggest that I lack intelligence to understand complexities of American foreign policy, based solely on the fact that I called wrong wrong.

Another quote, by Adam Smith:

"According to the system of natural liberty, the sovereign has only three duties to attend to ... first, the duty of protecting the society from the violence and invasion of other independent societies; secondly, the duty of protecting, so far as possible, every member of the society from the injustice or oppression of every other member of it, or the duty of establishing an exact administration of justice, and thirdly, the duty of erecting and maintaining certain public works and certain public institutions, which it can never be for the interest of any individual, or small number of individuals, to erect and maintain..."

The frustration my rant came from is how can their total disregarded of the above quoted principle not piss you off and make you roar? And yet, republicans and evangelicals freely yell foul that Obama called Palin a pig, it gets in all the newspapers, and he didn't...they lie and lie and get away with it and Democrats keep playing fairly and keep loosing.

[Kuskovian]

Your one sided pretense leaves much to be desired.

Especially when the "side" you so obviously support is just as guilty in every way of the very things you are "ranting" against.

The pot does indeed aparently like to call the kettle black.

[craven]

Mmmmmm I am not so sure big K that this is quite the positional debate or argument that maybe your post seems to paint it as, though I do appreciate that if one feels someone is having a pop at ones country, whether correctly or incorrectly construed it can result in divisional positioning maybe, it is a free world in the main so feel free to comment.

I have taken from daymantis posts that she is indeed not anti American, or seeking to advocate a defined or better alternative, far from it, the crux of her case I have take to be that America is indeed a great country with many good points and attributes not least of which is the good and upstanding morally right majority.

However this majority seems powerless or rather muted in the face of the total and contrived power of the neo conservatives who seem hell bent on using or rather employing the role of the US as the worlds police man and moral guardians as a smokescreen whilst they follow their own self serving agendas and policies.

I am not anti American, not at all, I do however cringe when I read and hear some of the rhetoric being spouted by your leaders, the religious element of the war on terror is very frightening, and plays into the hands of those on the opposite end of the Muslim far right extremists scales hands, they would love to paint their struggle as that of the righteous Muslims defending their rights and homelands from the marauding and invading infidels, I think that such comments and rhetoric are possibly the best recruiting propaganda that the extremists could ever hope for. Any statement linking god of what ever denomination or belief to that of armed aggression or conflict is very, very dangerous and self serving, religion has historically been the morphine of the masses used by leaders to keep their citizens in line throughout the ages.

Europe is not perfect, not by any stretch of the imagination; but I do feel that we as citizens are closer to the running of and direction that our countries take, not as close as we should be of course or there would not be any of our boys shedding their blood in the name of who knows what in distant sandy lands. We are however more vocal and able to influence our leaders policies.

America has traditionally been the land of the free, yet of late to us Europeans you seem to be strangely quiet and subservient to the whims and wishes of your leaders, I feel that this was the crux of daymantis post, and given her ability to state her opinions so forthrightly I am sure she will correct me if I am wrong anyway.

I feel that if as a nation America is to be the world’s policeman then I want to see a lot more democratic control of its actions and intent; because at the moment, me as an individual, I am not comfortable with how the American government (not people) is using its power and position.

There seems to be from the outside looking at any rate little will and interest from those able to do so in America to address this either, this concerns me deeply.

[Torq]

As folks know (or should) in the Politics threads there is a bit more latitude in posts as long as they are opinions ON THE TOPIC. Before this thread goes 'to far south' as it appears ALL posters re-read this sticky

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14615

Opinions on the Topic

Be Well
T

[damyanti]

As folks know (or should) in the Politics threads there is a bit more latitude in posts as long as they are opinions ON THE TOPIC. Before this thread goes 'to far south' as it appears ALL posters re-read this sticky

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14615

Opinions on the Topic

Be Well
T

I appreciate your vigilance, but I don't think anyone has done that. All I did was state my opinion (craven got it), and I wont bother reiterating it here to you, I am sure you have read my posts thoughtfully.
And if you a referring to some people reading into my posts hostility, that I have clearly stated isn't what I am saying, I don't mind - they are just proving my point and the level at which political discussion in USA is being conducted.

[damyanti]

Your one sided pretense leaves much to be desired.


Yes, only Americans are entitled to that. :rolleyes:

And I wasn't doing that anyway.

[damyanti]

Hopping in to say I love your signature, damyanti: "The deepest rivers flow with the least sound."

It's very thoughtful.

I do get your point, Amber, but I don't think you have gotten mine.

My quote is a lovely sentiment...and some may find it interesting in the matters of sexuality and spirituality...but as a political strategy...you tried that twice and you lost both times. How about you try something else for a change, something Americans used to be so good at...keeping vigilance; "Evil prospers when good men do nothing", would be the more appropriate quote.

And if you are trying to tell me, as some, that its all in my head....that I have nothing to worry about. I am sorry, but based on their rhetoric and how easily they get away with misconstruing the truth...the very real possibility of McCain/Palin ticket scares the shit out of me. The same people who got Bush elected over and over again are working with them. You told us not to worry before Bush got elected the first time...are you really going to try to persuade me that that turned out well?

[denuseri]

I believe the one sided pretence comes from the obvious pounding on the conservatives and glorifing the liberals through out the vast majority of the "rant" however unintentional the claim to the otherwise may be, it is too apparent.

Both parties of which are just as bad as the other when it comes to political tricks, sophism and propagandizing dogma.

The complaceny of the people being the real culpurit in the topic (i assume). Which isnt inheirently the cuase of any one party or group.

The point is that attacking or highlighting one groups deficiencies isnt helping the argument as it obfuscates it with all the clutter of partisanship political leanings.

Complacency of the citizen body has allways been the downfall of every great nation from rome to great brittian to russia to the usa.

Many have argued counter points to all of the above in numerous politically orientated threads painting one side or the other as the bad guys.

The system itself is the real culprit.

Like the many evolutions of representative governemental systems of the past, once a certian threshold in size and scope is reached; a certian degree of lethergy is experienced on the part of the populace and a certian degree of tyranny is realized by those in charge.

[DowntownAmber]

I do get your point, Amber, but I don't think you have gotten mine.

And my point is...? *sits back and relaxes and waits to hear what I think*


My quote is a lovely sentiment...and some may find it interesting in the matters of sexuality and spirituality...but as a political strategy...you tried that twice and you lost both times. How about you try something else for a change, something Americans used to be so good at...keeping vigilance; "Evil prospers when good men do nothing", would be the more appropriate quote.

You seem to be claiming a rather intimate knowledge of my particular stance in regard to American politics. In fact, I don't believe we've ever spoken to each other before, are you even sure of my nationality? There are a myriad of political positions out there, I rarely discuss mine on line so where is this rather pointed "you" coming from?


And if you are trying to tell me, as some, that its all in my head....that I have nothing to worry about.

*checks my last post just to make sure* Nope, didn't recall telling you that, but I checked twice to make sure.


I am sorry, but based on their rhetoric and how easily they get away with misconstruing the truth...the very real possibility of McCain/Palin ticket scares the shit out of me. The same people who got Bush elected over and over again are working with them. You told us not to worry before Bush got elected the first time...are you really going to try to persuade me that that turned out well?

*rereads prior post one more time to make sure I didn't miss something I may have typed about trying to brainwash the OP* Doesn't look like I was trying to persuade you of that. And I'm fairly sure I didn't know you prior to the last election, or the one prior to that so I am going to say with certainty that I never patted you on the head and told you "not to worry" either.

My point (now that I think we have cleared up what my point is not) is simply that a rant is noise and smoke and the same ineffective rhetoric as that it claims to rally against. There is power in words, and when they are used to insult and to point fingers, when they are littered with phrases such as, "why don't (fill in "offending" parties here) do this and this and that," and so on, well, they loose their ability to affect change and they simply add to the general sense of irritated apathy so many people nurture.

Replace the "why" with "how" and "what." Instead of saying "why don't you..." say things like "how can I..." and "what can I..." Fill in the ends of those sentences with something useful, then back the sentiment with action. If you're passionate about the political scene, start a thread with something like, "I have issues wih the political climate in the US so I have started a blog detailing false statements in candidate speeches," or "I have put together a list of political positions that Obama has that I agree with and here's why..."

The best way to make someone "shut up" is not to rant as they do and tell them to stuff it, but to affect changes and take action that make their words obviously transparent and ineffective.

Perhaps they are missed in the international media, but there are some busy busy folks in the US who are the forefront of very agressive political grassroots campaigns for both of the candidates. Young voters and even those too young to vote are flooding the scene en masse to communicate the changes they want and feel they need - more young people, in fact, than have been involved in an election at this level in a very long time.

If these action takers, these passionate hard workers are being overlooked by the media and by international onlookers, so be it. The deep river, it appears, is indeed flowing with very little sound. No matter, they'll make their noise at the polls in November.

[damyanti]

I believe the one sided pretence comes from the obvious pounding on the conservatives and glorifing the liberals through out the vast majority of the "rant" however unintentional the claim to the otherwise may be, it is too apparent.

Both parties of which are just as bad as the other when it comes to political tricks, sophism and propagandizing dogma.

The complaceny of the people being the real culpurit in the topic (i assume). Which isnt inheirently the cuase of any one party or group.

The point is that attacking or highlighting one groups deficiencies isnt helping the argument as it obfuscates it with all the clutter of partisanship political leanings.

Complacency of the citizen body has allways been the downfall of every great nation from rome to great brittian to russia to the usa.

Many have argued counter points to all of the above in numerous politically orientated threads painting one side or the other as the bad guys.

The system itself is the real culprit.

Like the many evolutions of representative governemental systems of the past, once a certian threshold in size and scope is reached; a certian degree of lethergy is experienced on the part of the populace and a certian degree of tyranny is realized by those in charge.


That has been one of my original questions....where does this animosity of "middle America" towards those who label themselves liberal and intellectual coming from?

I am not enamored with Obama (I have a very healthy dose of skepticism towards any politician and lofty claims), but as far as lesser evils go, he is pretty good one.....and if the other choice are Palin and McCain.

There is nothing shameful and immoral in being a liberal, and irony is a lot of the liberals lead far more conservative lives than those who spew hateful, neo conservative propaganda.

I do agree that Democrats are guilty of not speaking up and taking a stand, and many of them are far from saints...but even the worst Democrat who is guilty "of to political tricks, sophism and propagandizing dogma" seems like a pathetically week amateur compared to those who have been calling the shots on the Republican side.

When it comes to foreign policy, (and what is my primary concern) Democrats certainly seem like a more reasonable and humane option....I will sleep a lot more peacefully if I know that on the other side of the negotiating with Medvedev (could someone please inform Palin, that Putin is no longer the president of Russia) and Putin (he is the current prime minister) sits Biden.

Being liberal means that everyone has the right to their own beliefs, but the law is impartial and equal to all...that used to be the American way. We have a very clear impression that it no longer is.

I don't recall anyone thumping religion as the core issue during Clinton presidency,...during his presidency the world had very little problem accepting the USA role as world cop...economy was in a pretty good state too...and can you even remember what the price of gas was at that time (it seems like fiction today). No body in American history ever got everything so catastrophically wrong as Bush did...arguably, at the end of Clinton presidency world was moving towards the goal of world peace, today, at the end of Bushs we are moving towards the third world war. Bush pretty much, with no consequences and very little blatant opposition, ignored system of checks and balances. So yes, I don't know where I get the idea that one side is less evil than the other.

I am not comfortable with people who have a unilateral view of everything, absolute belief that they have divine blessing and unless its their way...its gun to your face and you are labeled the enemy. (And there doesnt seem to be the outrage of general public of such rhetoric.) Every time I hear Palin speak she cements it a little bit more that she is one such individual; and if anything, she is hailed as the voice of ordinary Americans.

People who have no respect for diplomacy and are very comfortable wielding weapons...are dangerous and scare me. War should always be the very, very absolute last solution - not something you do easily and without blinking. And when you go to war, it would be desirable to think things through.

Is Obama going to be the great president and make all the wrongs right...hardly unlikely, but chances are good that he wont make things worse, while with McCain/Palin things are practically guaranteed to deteriorate, (possibly to the point of unimaginable).

[denuseri]

You have just reproved my point again.

If you don't recall religion as being an issue during the Clinton campaign's then perhaps you didn't pay close attention. It's been an issue in allmost every presidental bid throughout american history.

As for heading to world peace,,smh, its a lofty goal that every administration has claimed to strive for. Few have even gotten near let alone close. Least of all the president that made the office of president into a farce filled with open coruption IE: Clinton.

The liberals are just as guilty of speading hateful propaganda in every way I have seen it used here throughout the "rant" in paticular. If you don't agree with "liberal beliefs" than you get branded as a neo-conservative fanatic? Sounds like propagoanda of the lowest variety in plain view.

As for Bush being wrong,, no more so the LBJ with vietnam which was just as likely to draw us into WW3.

I doubt McCain is going to push us into a war, he at least knows what one is like unlike his opponents.

People who have no respect for democracy......hummm, sounds like yet another one sided put down.

Fact of the matter is, anyone in America can within reason; so long as they are not inciting treason or revolt, say pretty much whatever they want to. Including the one's you don't agree with.

I see the call for censorship of the evangelicals today ,to be as equally reproachable as the call made by southern democrats to censor civil rights speaches in the 50's & 60's.

[damyanti]

I see the call for censorship of the evangelicals [/COLOR]

That has been my point, everyone else is being censored except them.

And if you can give statements that make Bush sound like that he wasn't more wrong than other US presidents, :eek: :eek: :eek:.

As for the rest of your post...just proves my concerns are well founded. It is possible to be a religious person and respect the liberal ideal that everyone has the right to their own beliefs.


"Fact of the matter is, anyone in America can within reason; so long as they are not inciting treason or revolt, say pretty much whatever they want to. Including the one's you don't agree with."

So why was Keith Olbermann made to shut up? What about all the statements from Bush and his cronies that unless you support him you are with the terrorists?

Its the conservatives who always yell foul not Liberals...and my beef is that liberals don't, not nearly as ferociously.
No one tried to force Bristol Palin to abort, but her mother, if given chance, will do everything in her power to force her religious beliefs on other young teenagers and force them to give birth when they don't want. I don't have a problem with their beliefs, but the aggressive way in which they want to legislature it is something I find very dangerous.

Anyway all of that is the matter of your personal policies and you can have your country any way you like - what would be nice, is if you let the rest of the world enjoy the same luxury. You think McCain/Palin ticket will be equally successful in matters of foreign policy? Who will negotiate with them, when all they are seen is as more of the same (Bush)? Who will respect them when they are condescending towards other world leaders? When Obama came to Europe there were rallies of support of unbelievable proportion. We don't want McCain to visit at all, and if he does, he can expect pretty much the same "welcome" Bush receives every time he imposes himself on us.

[denuseri]

Well since my attempt to actually speak about the real issue which is effecting ALL countires including the US didnt work or was completely ignored, i will have to come down to the lower playing field and I am gonna play as devils advocate just a bit here since i find it so absurd and use sophist techniques since, they seem to be favored over reason:

But to prove the point that a sophist argument such as the "rant" has no basis:

Everyone censored??? Hardley, most censoship in america is actually preformed by liberal supporting media that censors by omission and spin what they dont want reported , unless it gets then controvesial ratings and if evangelicals get any press coverage its ussually painted to be negative becuase it cuases controvesy which makes the networks money.

Liberals actually SHOUT foul way more often and with a lot more covereage than any conservative dares or ever gets to.

Looks like you have never watched any american politics at all, (outside of a very focused liberal filter) if anything the liberal agenda gets the majority of the attention allmost all the time in america.

And Keith Olbermann is one of the most LOUDLY outspoken propagandist out there, and he is everywhere, hardley censored. SMH

and saying McCain is more of the same doesnt make it so, no matter how much you want everyone to think it is your arguments sound like another example of a poor advertising tactics used by car salesman when they are as onesided as they are.

And your WE dont want statement strikes me as rather absurd. Just which "we" are you? Becuase you certiantly dont speak for all.

Of course its easy to throw whoppers from the peanut gallery whever your paticular peanut gallery may be.

Of course thats the problem with sophistry it's all to easy to turn it completely in a circle.

Which just proves my concerns are well founded. It is impossible to be a liberal person and respect the religious ideal that everyone has the right to their own beliefs.

Should I continue this example?

No need becuase your next post shall prove my point again?

Sophist rehtoric as opinion is fine use it all day long I dont care turn yourself blue with it, just dont expect me to swallow an argument with no logical basis behind it.

[fetishdj]

Like Ragoczy pointed out, please don't attempt to characterize some 300 million very different people as a single entity. The US has some states the size of independent countries; referring to all Americans as one is like grouping the English and the French as "Europeans."



Unfortunately, this stereotype is the one that is currently projected to the rest of the world. Most intelligent people know that generalisations and stereotypes do not apply to all members of a culture and common sense tells us that it is ridiculous to assume so. However, common sense is the least common of the senses and there are an awful lot of people who take the 'easy' option.

A comment I remember being made about the holocaust was that German propaganda had stated that 'all Jews were evil'. However, every good German citizen apparently knew at least one 'good Jew'. The numbers here just do not add up given that the non Jews in Germany pre war far outnumbered the Jewish population. Now it is possible (but very unlikely) that every German citizen knew the same 'good Jew' and he had a lot of friends. However, it is far more likely that there were more good jews than the propaganda stated...

Media images along with how you present yourself can form impressions of a culture. It alarms me that fundamentalists are being associated strongly with thier relevant religions to the extent that many beleive that what they beleive is that religion. It applies to Muslims and Christians equally. I know many muslims and none of them are terrorists but it is a common beleif that all muslims are.

The beliefs of fundamentalists from both religions are far removed from the actual beliefs of those faiths. Christianity and Islam have a lot in common and are founded on what are fundamentally the same basis (there is one god, the concepts of charity and compassion and so on). Indeed, Muslims recognise what they refer to as the 'three peoples of the book' these being Islam, Christianity and Judaism thereby recognising the common root.

I think the problem is that with a fundamentalist in political power (as occurs in both America and many middle east countries fairly often) the beliefs of that particular branch of fundamentalism gets amplified so that, for example, Sharia law is imposed or abortion/contraception gets banned. These give the impression (especially when it is a democracy) that all the citizens of that country agree with the politician's beleifs even if they do not.

This is why I beleive that there needs to be a strong seperation of church and state in any government. Government has no place in controlling how churches manage themselves (so long as they do not break the law) and the church has no right to interfere in government.

Ironically, in Britain we have an apparent link between church and state (the head of state, the Monarch, is also the head of the Church of England and is by law forbidden from practising any other religion) but an effective seperation because the monarch has no right (at present) to pass any law without the support of parliament.

[AdrianaAurora]

OMG, I thought you were a better person than that, Denuseri and for you to sink so low. You discussed no issue, but to tell her that her opinion is invalid. And your post - I thought we don't allow personal attacks and flaming on this site. And for what - because she dared to openly state what the rest of the world thinks of us. Because that is what the rest of the world thinks of us (and thats who, I assume, she meant by "we"). Have you bothered to read foreign newspapers and have you traveled abroad in the last 6 years, you would know that. You don't have to like her opinion, but she is entitled to it. That is called free speech.



Fact of the matter is, anyone in America can within reason; so long as they are not inciting treason or revolt, say pretty much whatever they want to. Including the one's you don't agree with.


Oh, there it lies the trap, its the great patriotic republicans who decide what is treason and revolt, right. What about the treason VP Cheney committed when he outed CIA agent? What about treason of George Bush who went to war without the vote of Congress? What about treason of Colin Powell who knowingly lied to UN Security Council? What about the treason of Alberto Gonzales and the rest of the Bush cronies?

I find your statement personally offensive because I was one of those who was denied the right to free speech and threatened that if I don't fall into the party line I will loose my job, be discredited personally and that they will destroy my family (I can PM you what my big sin was). I quit. I also recall a small matter of fired US attorneys because they refused to stop investigating Bush's friends. I could go on and on...but why bother? The day Bush got elected for second term I lost all faith in US, packed my bags and moved my family to France - I couldn't stand the climate of oppression and doom. It is highly unlikely I will ever move back. And if you are hoping to convince anyone that Bush is a great president - keep dreaming.

And she was being kind - I will put it bluntly, world despises US and its high handed international policies. The difference with which people take my views if they know I am American, or if they think that I am Canadian is unbelievable. They are weary of us - and thats the consequence of 8 years of Bush. The only reason I am given a break is because I am married to Canadian and I am only part American. You cant use fear and war and you cant demand respect without giving none.

And don't even get me started on Palin, who was only selected for her bimbo value. And I base my argument on the fact that she supports the war, has sent her son to Iraq - both based on Bush's Doctrine and she doesnt even know what that is. So much about being able to debate facts with republicans these days.

I for one would love if these "evangelicals" who have "kidnapped" the republican party crawled back into whatever swamp they crawled out from.

One thing you are right though, she was wrong - McCain isn't the new Bush, Palin is.
(Not that McCain matters anyway, he is already half dead.) And as for him knowing anything about war - he screwed up and was captured on his first mission, and that was decades ago.

I will stop now, this theme depresses the hell out of me. Congratulations though, you probably succeeded in confirming her stereotype - that we are all belligerent, war hounds and that we all posses sanctimonious belief in our own greatness that renders us incapable to rationally respond to or accept any criticism.

[denuseri]

I have never said one isnt intitaled to thier opinion.

For the record i am not nor have i ever been a supporter of the evangelical movements attempts to control the republicans, any more than i have supported the s o c i o l i s t s attempts to take over the democrats.

As i said it was an example turned back on its self ( devils advocate) to show why the rant was an argument made with complete bias of such a one sided kind that it has no base in logic and ergo deserves rebuttle.

I find the assumtion that i am sinking so low or flameing when i have simply turned sophistry back on itself as and example personally offensive Aurora which its too easy to just point at your own post and say its flameing me ? come now,

the constitution speaks of the right of free speach and sets the standards by which is allowed, specifically that treason and inciting a riot are the areas under which it is to be denied, and not by any one party but judicial review, i have seen both parties when in power abuse the interpetation of the law, thomas Jefferson even abused it by holding the surpreme court hostage once, its abuse is even more rampant in many european countries not to mention the countires that have no free speach.

But I see censorship takes many forms when people read between the lines of a post or have a personal involvement and I am sorry if you took personal offence.

(also Bush did happen to get congresses approval prior just like his father did for the first gulf war he cant wage a war without them backing him) and i have never supported him, nor most of his policies, read my numerous other posts

Anyone can get up and spout such statements out the political realm on both sides which doesnt frequently result in any valuable out come when both sides are going to resort to such tactics instead of looking at facts or other emperical evidence, instead of ranting I ask ok then what is the solution to the question posed by the thread, how do we solve compacency? but to do that we need consensus, which cant be achieved when one side continues to rant as opposed to work to a solution .

One persons opinion doesnt speak for everyone, its impossible, blanket statements about opinions of world populations are often tools of the media and ussually based in poor if any statistical anaylasis. I would love to see a system by which real world populations actual opinions could be 100% reported as accurate, but the technology or drive to deliver it doesnt exist yet.

I get my news from more scources than you think, and have been, I have walked the streets of beruit and jeruselem, i have many relatives that live there and in germany, i am in contact with both the jewish and arab sides by blood. I have seen how my mother and our families were driven out of thier country over issues that were exacerbated by failed brittish polcies in the middle east that the usa is no closer to fixing today.

What shocks me is when people swallow such sophistry, instead of recognizing it for what it is.

As for confirming her stereotype? What about the stereotype she is portraying i ask you? I see a sterotype just as bilegerent and sanctimonious; expouseing a belief that renders us incapable to rationally respond to or accept any criticism.

Electing a new President of eaither party or a few senators in america isnt going to in and of itself change the worlds situation. The problems with ever decreasing rescources or the complacency of populations under tyrany by voluntary oppression (democracy). The divisions that exist between the conservative and liberal factions of all democratic governements are not going away by having one or the other side "win".

The fact of the matter is in america most people are moderates, that only lean to the left or right on specific issues with a minority of indivduals that loadly shout propaganda for thier side from the wings, which is why the past few elections have been so close.

Solutions are only going to come when both sides stop mudslinging and sit down to a real discussion.

I am out .
peace.

[craven]

Unfortunately, this stereotype is the one that is currently projected to the rest of the world. Most intelligent people know that generalisations and stereotypes do not apply to all members of a culture and common sense tells us that it is ridiculous to assume so. However, common sense is the least common of the senses and there are an awful lot of people who take the 'easy' option.

Ironically, in Britain we have an apparent link between church and state (the head of state, the Monarch, is also the head of the Church of England and is by law forbidden from practising any other religion) but an effective seperation because the monarch has no right (at present) to pass any law without the support of parliament.

I agree totally, it is very dangerous and plays totally into the hands of the extremists on both sides if religion is used as some form of justification for military or terrorist acts, after all one man's freedom fighter is another's terrorist, give him religion as a rational for his actions and you raise the profile and polarize the different positions.

it is interesting that you make the point about the UK and our link between the church and state, for many, many years the UK fought the IRA, an exclusively Catholic organisation, however at no point was religion ever introduced by the state or media in terms of the conflict, never were acts carried out by the IRA attributed to Catholic freedom fighters, they were also referred to as the IRA or a liberation movement.

Incidentally a terrorist organisation that enjoyed considerable support and funding from Americans.

both AdrianaAurora and Daymanti have if truth be told watered down the strength of feeling here in Europe about the distrust of the US governments foreign policy and use of religious conviction in their case for the prosecution of so called rogue states or the axis of evil countries, feelings do run very high over here, i dread to think how the US is thought of in Africa and the Middle East.

no one posting so far has at all attacked America per se, the mistrust and resentment felt is directed squarely at the Bush administration, who it appears to us outside the US seem to be able to act with impunity and total disregard for both the internal laws of the US and international laws as well as seeming to show a complete lack or respect or understanding for the rules of dimplomacy and protocols.

The initial post, sorry to keep reverting back to it was made by Daymanti to highlight these apparent wrong doings, and bring attention to the fact that looking from the outside in, us Europeans have the viewpoint that no one seems to care, or have the will to challenge what is going on.

Without some form of checks or balances the flagrant abuses of power that to me seem to be being conducted run the risk of escalating.

Daymanti was i believe seeking to focus attention, OR ask for clarification from those within the US as to what was being done to challenge the current administration.

NO one dislikes Americans trust me, but the reputation of the country is being severely tarnished and devalued as a result of the evangelicals rhetoric and the Bush administrations apparent lack of respect for domestic and international law.

[damyanti]

Daymanti was i believe seeking to focus attention, OR ask for clarification from those within the US as to what was being done to challenge the current administration.

NO one dislikes Americans trust me, but the reputation of the country is being severely tarnished and devalued as a result of the evangelicals rhetoric and the Bush administrations apparent lack of respect for domestic and international law.

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is precisely what was my point. And no one from across the pond bothered to answer those, instead they chose to attack me for generalizing all Americans into the same basket (though, more than once I pointed that is not my view).

I remember the mood in Europe during the first Bush presidential campaign, the general consensus was...we cant believe you are going to elect that retarded, rich jerk, he is going to be the disaster....I also remember the outpour of messages from US about how we don't understand anything and who we are to dare tell them who to pick for president....we all know how that ended.

p.s. denuseri in my previous post I said diplomacy not democracy. In your response that I favour one side over the other, sure I am - Obama talks about engaging people into talks and about reviving up US diplomacy. (When Russia attacked Georgia, it was Sarkozy who went to Russia and negotiated the deal with Putin and Medvedev. Then Rice came, nobody paid attention to her, but she had to come to have her pictures taken and to make it look like she did there something that mattered. What conclusion, of the state of US diplomacy, do you draw from that?) McCain talks about "100 years of war", Palin talks about going to war with Russia, (and pretty much anyone else who stands in her way) with such casualness. My point was that such rhetoric scares me! And that I find the lack of general revolt and the level of applause for it, very worrisome. That is the sentiment that comes across, I didn't make it up.

I don't care about sides, anyone who favors peace, diplomacy and the right of others to freedom - is the one who has my support.

Anyway, like AdrianaAurora said the whole thing is very depressing and very frustrating...so I am done, (I like it here and dont want to get banned) and anyway I said everything I had to say in the above posts. I hope McCain/Palin dont win...and if they do I hope they dont screw the world politics with even more conflict...(but it is likely that they will) and if they do...I doubt it will matter, - unless the conflict happens on US soil and you get to see the reality of war and that it is not the undertaking to be taken lightly - you will regardless call him "good president" by the mere fact that he is president and that he is American.

[denuseri]

Ok back for one clarification:

I am sorry if my approch was seen as a personal attack by anyone.

My sole purpose was to try and get people to realize that when they use the techniques that i saw in the "rant" or my satiric rebuttle of "devils advocacy" used to highlight it in paticular; that they will find no common ground or diplomacy becuase both are too inflamatory and use dogma over fact.

Which defeats any attempt to come to an agreement.

Based off the opinions i have seen put forth here I believe that many in the international community have fallen prey to the controvesy driven liberal bias of the united state's own media and its infulence abroad when it come to painting assumptive characteratures of both of the american cantidates, giving the populace of the whole world a misguilded viewpoint that one is on thier side and one is against them.



People that have followed the Republican primaries closely know just how pissed the evangelical minority is at McCain being the choice made by the moderate majority for the GOP, there is a little war being waged in that party for its control and he is against Bush's side in it, not for it. Despite what you may have been lead to believe by the opposition.

A simular war has taken place in the democrates party with insidious outcomes, Obama has appeared to win on the surface, but when he refused totruely unite his party and took on Biden as his watchdog instead, I saw that he had lost the idealogical battle or at least suffered a severe setback.

Despite his inexperience i was for a long time one of his supporters, his demogogery and idealisum apealled to me. I have infact vacilated three times so far before the election, and probably will again as i gather more data, as opposed to rehtoric. But i am an independent despite my party affiliation which i keep to access at least one half of the primary proccess so vacilation is our middle name.

In these days ahead where our worlds rescources and populations are reaching Malthusian proportions, it will take more than mere idealisum or good intentions to save the world let alone preserve our own country, which has taken on too many of the worlds burdens despite our own peoples many misgivings, History has shown it was out of nessesity to preserve capitalisum at the time, unless you all prefered to learn german or later russian.

Which is where we started our own history of butting in, which i will admit i dont like that its been maintained or what its become becuase i see too many simularities with france and great brittans mishandeling of thier colonial empires which colapsed.

I unfortunately see many many years of strife to come and if an when america falls it will be dificult to avoid the collapse of western civilatation simular to or worse than what was suffered after rome's decline.

I can assure you regaurdless of who wins the election in the United States he is most assuradly on America's side first ..and everyone elses second.

[hopperboo]

It is possible to be a religious person and respect the liberal ideal that everyone has the right to their own beliefs.

Its the conservatives who always yell foul not Liberals...and my beef is that liberals don't, not nearly as ferociously.

No one tried to force Bristol Palin to abort, but her mother, if given chance, will do everything in her power to force her religious beliefs on other young teenagers and force them to give birth when they don't want. I don't have a problem with their beliefs, but the aggressive way in which they want to legislature it is something I find very dangerous.

Anyway all of that is the matter of your personal policies and you can have your country any way you like - what would be nice, is if you let the rest of the world enjoy the same luxury. You think McCain/Palin ticket will be equally successful in matters of foreign policy? Who will negotiate with them, when all they are seen is as more of the same (Bush)? Who will respect them when they are condescending towards other world leaders? When Obama came to Europe there were rallies of support of unbelievable proportion. We don't want McCain to visit at all, and if he does, he can expect pretty much the same "welcome" Bush receives every time he imposes himself on us.

It isn't possible to be religious person and respect the idea of an "oops" abortion. (The healthy, adult, sexually active woman who doesn't bother with birth control because she's too lazy and ends up getting pregnant and saying it was 'a mistake.') And just for the record I am pro-choice. And abstinent. IMHO.

It isn't possible to be a religious person and denounce your beliefs because other people feel it isn't politically correct. (Heaven forbid someone get their feelings hurt). IMHO.

I find that America is (and has been) falling further and further away from religion, and perhaps that is why some of the extremists are being rather loud. They see that loss. Though no extreme is healthy, that is for sure.

As for McCain not getting a welcome from other countries...well, frankly I don't really care what his welcome is like. He'd be the president of the United States, and we'd be the one having to deal with him on a daily basis. :D I don't believe McCain will be another Bush. I like how he goes between the parties. There are a few things I am not wild about, but overall he is a much better choice than Obama. I think Obama would be more worried about forgien policy than America. (Not to mention, I'd love to see him sit down and talk Al Qaeda and ask then why they aren't' being nice). I'd be willing to bet he'd invite them over to the USA for coffee and a chat...sorry, not the person I want running my country.

[damyanti]

It isn't possible to be religious person and respect the idea of an "oops" abortion. (The healthy, adult, sexually active woman who doesn't bother with birth control because she's too lazy and ends up getting pregnant and saying it was 'a mistake.') And just for the record I am pro-choice. And abstinent. IMHO.

It isn't possible to be a religious person and denounce your beliefs because other people feel it isn't politically correct. (Heaven forbid someone get their feelings hurt). IMHO.

I find that America is (and has been) falling further and further away from religion, and perhaps that is why some of the extremists are being rather loud. They see that loss. Though no extreme is healthy, that is for sure.

As for McCain not getting a welcome from other countries...well, frankly I don't really care what his welcome is like. He'd be the president of the United States, and we'd be the one having to deal with him on a daily basis. :D I don't believe McCain will be another Bush. I like how he goes between the parties. There are a few things I am not wild about, but overall he is a much better choice than Obama. I think Obama would be more worried about forgien policy than America. (Not to mention, I'd love to see him sit down and talk Al Qaeda and ask then why they aren't' being nice). I'd be willing to bet he'd invite them over to the USA for coffee and a chat...sorry, not the person I want running my country.


So since it is against religion it should be against the law? Prohibited for everyone? So if someone is religious ergo he must be be intolerant of everyone else's choice and right to live their life as they see fit? And who gets to decide which religion is the religion?

You are welcome to McCain, but I don't want him for president of my country. In that case, kindly pack up your troops home and excuse yourself from meddling into matters of other nations. You have to deal with him (your president) on daily basis?...So do we! Everyday I have to live with the consequences of his actions.

[Ragoczy]

So since it is against religion it should be against the law? Prohibited for everyone? So if someone is religious ergo he must be be intolerant of everyone else's choice and right to live their life as they see fit? And who gets to decide which religion is the religion?

The abortion question doesn't hinge on religion, it hinges on when life begins. It just so happens that religion provides some people with an answer to that question.

If you have a fundamental belief that life begins at conception, that from that point it is a unique, human life, then, whatever the source of that belief, you have a duty to oppose abortion and it's reasonable to attempt to make illegal what you believe is murder.

Their position is not to impose their religion on others, but to oppose what they believe is wholesale murder -- again, it's a reasonable position given that belief.

Unfortunately, the answer to when it's a human life isn't answerable. Personally, I have issues with the extremes on both sides of the debate.

I think it's ridiculous to argue that it's a human being right after conception and hypocritical to say "well, okay, we'll let you murder that baby if you were raped".

On the other side are the proponents of abortion on-demand in the third trimester. Arguing that at eight months it isn't a human baby and has no rights is disgusting and reprehensible to me.

Again, unfortunately, we have no measuring stick for where that line between blob of cells and baby actually lies. The question I ask is:

Given that our entire legal system is based on the premise that it's better to allow the guilty to go free than to punish the innocent, that doubt should always fall to the possibility of innocence, shouldn't the maybe-child get the same benefit as the maybe-innocent-murderer?

[hopperboo]

So since it is against religion it should be against the law? Prohibited for everyone? So if someone is religious ergo he must be be intolerant of everyone else's choice and right to live their life as they see fit? And who gets to decide which religion is the religion?

You are welcome to McCain, but I don't want him for president of my country. In that case, kindly pack up your troops home and excuse yourself from meddling into matters of other nations. You have to deal with him (your president) on daily basis?...So do we! Everyday I have to live with the consequences of his actions.
No, I didn't say things that were against religion should be against the law. I said I don't have to (nor does a country) have respect for it. Again, that is just my personal opinion. Many people believe those who are not tolerant and respectful of every lifestyle are close-minded and bad, when I don't see it that way at all. People form opinions of what is right based on religion and their own beliefs and upbringing. How respectful is it to throw everything one believes in away because someone might get some feelings hurt? Forming and opinion and backing up that opinion isn't close-minded. It's a choice. Sitting on the fence, hurling insults at people who dare to form an opinion is not respectful either. (That is meant as a general comment, not a personal insult to you).

As for who decides what religion is paramount, the USA was founded on Christian beliefs. Yes, it founded on the right to freedom of religion, but if push comes to shove, it was founded on Christian beliefs.

It became our business when said country has terrorists that attack us. If other countries don't want us interfering they should get their own extremists groups under control.

[craven]

hmmmmm i really did not want to respond any more to this thread as i though it had run its cause, but i do feel the need to reply to the last paragraph of the past post.


I would ask which country established, equipped and funded the young Osama Bin Laden's now labeled terror movement, answer yes the US, to fight the soviets i appreciate however Afghanistan a pretty much lawless nation did not expel al Qaeda, but then in reality what ability the Afghan taliban government actually had to so so is questionable given that to date the combined powers of many Western nations have also been unable to oust this US funded terror movement.

Also Iraq, again a US established military led dictatorship, Saddam Hussein being a proven CIA operative.

I do not condone either movement, but please do not state that once the terror is brought to US shores then the US administration has a god given right to execute regime change or attack sovereign nations.

Lets be honest amongst ourselves here it was always the US's business the moment it established both Osama Bin Ladens movement and empowered Saddam Hussein.

Modern world politics has to have a longer than 4 year shelf life, time and time again we are all seeing and living through the fallout of such short terminsim.

I really dont want to post anymore, i feel that this thread has been done to death, but do please free free to comment or disagree, we all have those wonderful rights.