America and the ten step programme
-
An interesting article[^], whether you agree with it or not.
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet. The Bush administration has done nothing that the greatest national leaders in US history did not do on a much more vast and comprehensive scale. Historically, the only valid criticism of Bush is that he has not fully exercised the powers he is granted by the constitution to provide for the physical defense of the nation in his role as commander in chief that men such as Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt did. The problem is that the socialist left is making this an issue about George W. Bush. They seem to be perfectly comfortable with the power that has become invested in the US federal government since the 1930s. They want that power to be there, they just want to be the people controlling it. Since, after all, it was they who largely created it. The real ten step program began long before George W. Bush was even born. No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans. We were born into a nation in which all traditional checks and balances had been destroyed as a consequence of invokeing a terrifying internal and external enemy during the 1930's (The _internal enemy_being racism,homophobia, christianity, etc and the external enemy being the capitalistic control of the international economy). The federal government had used that as a scare tactic to stand our federalism on its head and convert itself into the only valid source of political power in the lives of Americans. The very spectre of a 'fascist state' is itself little more than a scare tactic to continue our march towards becoming a fullblown socialistic state. The shoe is entirely on the other foot. -- modified at 6:06 Wednesday 25th April, 2007
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
An interesting article[^], whether you agree with it or not.
I thought the article suitable food for thought. On the subject of the US; one thing that strikes me weird and totally bonkers is how the recent shooting at some school or other hasn't ignited a handgun-ban debate, it beggars belief. I suppose the NRA has a tight grip on the media.
-
I thought the article suitable food for thought. On the subject of the US; one thing that strikes me weird and totally bonkers is how the recent shooting at some school or other hasn't ignited a handgun-ban debate, it beggars belief. I suppose the NRA has a tight grip on the media.
AndyKEnZ wrote:
On the subject of the US; one thing that strikes me weird and totally bonkers is how the recent shooting at some school or other hasn't ignited a handgun-ban debate, it beggars belief.
Or a debate on immigration reform for that matter.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet. The Bush administration has done nothing that the greatest national leaders in US history did not do on a much more vast and comprehensive scale. Historically, the only valid criticism of Bush is that he has not fully exercised the powers he is granted by the constitution to provide for the physical defense of the nation in his role as commander in chief that men such as Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt did. The problem is that the socialist left is making this an issue about George W. Bush. They seem to be perfectly comfortable with the power that has become invested in the US federal government since the 1930s. They want that power to be there, they just want to be the people controlling it. Since, after all, it was they who largely created it. The real ten step program began long before George W. Bush was even born. No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans. We were born into a nation in which all traditional checks and balances had been destroyed as a consequence of invokeing a terrifying internal and external enemy during the 1930's (The _internal enemy_being racism,homophobia, christianity, etc and the external enemy being the capitalistic control of the international economy). The federal government had used that as a scare tactic to stand our federalism on its head and convert itself into the only valid source of political power in the lives of Americans. The very spectre of a 'fascist state' is itself little more than a scare tactic to continue our march towards becoming a fullblown socialistic state. The shoe is entirely on the other foot. -- modified at 6:06 Wednesday 25th April, 2007
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
We were born into a nation in which all traditional checks and balances had been destroyed as a consequence of invokeing a terrifying internal and external enemy during the 1930's (The internal enemybeing racism,homophobia, christianity, etc and the external enemy being the capitalistic control of the international economy).
Excellent, well worth quoting, perhaps you might have included communism in there too.
-
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet. The Bush administration has done nothing that the greatest national leaders in US history did not do on a much more vast and comprehensive scale. Historically, the only valid criticism of Bush is that he has not fully exercised the powers he is granted by the constitution to provide for the physical defense of the nation in his role as commander in chief that men such as Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt did. The problem is that the socialist left is making this an issue about George W. Bush. They seem to be perfectly comfortable with the power that has become invested in the US federal government since the 1930s. They want that power to be there, they just want to be the people controlling it. Since, after all, it was they who largely created it. The real ten step program began long before George W. Bush was even born. No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans. We were born into a nation in which all traditional checks and balances had been destroyed as a consequence of invokeing a terrifying internal and external enemy during the 1930's (The _internal enemy_being racism,homophobia, christianity, etc and the external enemy being the capitalistic control of the international economy). The federal government had used that as a scare tactic to stand our federalism on its head and convert itself into the only valid source of political power in the lives of Americans. The very spectre of a 'fascist state' is itself little more than a scare tactic to continue our march towards becoming a fullblown socialistic state. The shoe is entirely on the other foot. -- modified at 6:06 Wednesday 25th April, 2007
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet.
Hardly - the guardian has been left wing far longer than the internet's been mainstream. Also there's nothing extreme about it. Everything mentioned in that article is mainstream liberal, not extremist.
Stan Shannon wrote:
No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans.
Yeah. Especially the ones held in an internment camp and tortured with no right of trial, representation, or contact with the outside world. I remember that happening all the time in the sixties.
-
AndyKEnZ wrote:
On the subject of the US; one thing that strikes me weird and totally bonkers is how the recent shooting at some school or other hasn't ignited a handgun-ban debate, it beggars belief.
Or a debate on immigration reform for that matter.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Too true. No debate on anything anymore, is that the future? One thing though is that capitalism loves immigration, money always being the bottom line. You'd have a right old laugh if you knew what some of this countries best engineers are earning. Apart from lowering wages the political right don't give a damn about the people who just wanted to try and improve their lot. When the construction boom is over, there's going to be some serious problems. It's also an issue here in Europe, and I don't think controlling immigration can be as difficult as they say, most come into Spain through the capitals' international airport!
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet.
Hardly - the guardian has been left wing far longer than the internet's been mainstream. Also there's nothing extreme about it. Everything mentioned in that article is mainstream liberal, not extremist.
Stan Shannon wrote:
No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans.
Yeah. Especially the ones held in an internment camp and tortured with no right of trial, representation, or contact with the outside world. I remember that happening all the time in the sixties.
Craster wrote:
mainstream liberal
If its mainstream liberal that America is a fascist state, then the liberal mainstream is beginning to sound an awful lot like 1970's soviet propaganda, or juvenile polemic.
Craster wrote:
Especially the ones held in an internment camp
Er. Guantanimo is for foreign detainees, dipshit.
Last modified: 57mins after originally posted --
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Just another example of how the mainstream media has become a conduit for the leftwing extremism being promulgated via the internet.
Hardly - the guardian has been left wing far longer than the internet's been mainstream. Also there's nothing extreme about it. Everything mentioned in that article is mainstream liberal, not extremist.
Stan Shannon wrote:
No one born in the US since the end of WWII were "were born in freedom" as it would have been understood by any previous generation of Americans.
Yeah. Especially the ones held in an internment camp and tortured with no right of trial, representation, or contact with the outside world. I remember that happening all the time in the sixties.
Craster wrote:
Everything mentioned in that article is mainstream liberal, not extremist.
Now, that is scary! I'm glad you said it. If I had said it I would have been pummeled with the old 'the media isn't liberal' club.
Craster wrote:
Especially the ones held in an internment camp and tortured with no right of trial, representation, or contact with the outside world. I remember that happening all the time in the sixties.
I'm actually pretty sure no American citizen not captured on a foreign battlefield is being held in any 'interment camp'. The people who are being interred should be happy that a candy ass like Bush is in charge right now.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Too true. No debate on anything anymore, is that the future? One thing though is that capitalism loves immigration, money always being the bottom line. You'd have a right old laugh if you knew what some of this countries best engineers are earning. Apart from lowering wages the political right don't give a damn about the people who just wanted to try and improve their lot. When the construction boom is over, there's going to be some serious problems. It's also an issue here in Europe, and I don't think controlling immigration can be as difficult as they say, most come into Spain through the capitals' international airport!
AndyKEnZ wrote:
No debate on anything anymore, is that the future?
I actually don't know what you mean. 'Debate' is one of the most dynamic growth businesses in the US and around the world. What the hell do you think we are doing right now?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Craster wrote:
mainstream liberal
If its mainstream liberal that America is a fascist state, then the liberal mainstream is beginning to sound an awful lot like 1970's soviet propaganda, or juvenile polemic.
Craster wrote:
Especially the ones held in an internment camp
Er. Guantanimo is for foreign detainees, dipshit.
Last modified: 57mins after originally posted --
Ryan Roberts wrote:
Er. Guantanimo is for foreign detainees, dipshit.
Dipshit, eh? Nice way to construct an argument. Firstly, it's Guantanamo - spell it right if you want to talk about it. Secondly, I didn't mention Guantanamo. I personally was referring to the camp in Ethiopia where US citizen Amir Mohamed Meshal is being held by US Intelligence services.
-
Craster wrote:
Everything mentioned in that article is mainstream liberal, not extremist.
Now, that is scary! I'm glad you said it. If I had said it I would have been pummeled with the old 'the media isn't liberal' club.
Craster wrote:
Especially the ones held in an internment camp and tortured with no right of trial, representation, or contact with the outside world. I remember that happening all the time in the sixties.
I'm actually pretty sure no American citizen not captured on a foreign battlefield is being held in any 'interment camp'. The people who are being interred should be happy that a candy ass like Bush is in charge right now.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Now, that is scary! I'm glad you said it. If I had said it I would have been pummeled with the old 'the media isn't liberal' club.
No, being fair, the paper and the article are very much presenting a liberal viewpoint. I still believe the historical parallels are interesting, whether you think they are applicable or not.
-
Ryan Roberts wrote:
Er. Guantanimo is for foreign detainees, dipshit.
Dipshit, eh? Nice way to construct an argument. Firstly, it's Guantanamo - spell it right if you want to talk about it. Secondly, I didn't mention Guantanamo. I personally was referring to the camp in Ethiopia where US citizen Amir Mohamed Meshal is being held by US Intelligence services.
Craster wrote:
Amir Mohamed Meshal
Well, the US could just have let the Ethiopians deal with the Jihadi (i.e a real live actual fascist) I guess, rather than keep him in the worlds smallest internment camp.
-
Craster wrote:
Amir Mohamed Meshal
Well, the US could just have let the Ethiopians deal with the Jihadi (i.e a real live actual fascist) I guess, rather than keep him in the worlds smallest internment camp.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Now, that is scary! I'm glad you said it. If I had said it I would have been pummeled with the old 'the media isn't liberal' club.
No, being fair, the paper and the article are very much presenting a liberal viewpoint. I still believe the historical parallels are interesting, whether you think they are applicable or not.
Again, thank you. This is all evidence of the insanity controlling the left, and nothing else. Just for the sake of argument, suppose I agreed with you about these 'historic parallels'. What should we do to resolve them? Get rid of Bush? Is the answer that simple for you?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Surely the US government should be demanding his immediate extradition back to the US so that he can be assured protection and a fair trial in accordance with his rights as a US citizen? Ah - but wait. He's an arab, so why bother, eh?
Craster wrote:
Ah - but wait. He's an arab, so why bother, eh?
Were he a blond haired blue eyed Jihadi asshole my indifference to his fate after being caught on the wrong side of a foreign conflict would be equal.
-
Again, thank you. This is all evidence of the insanity controlling the left, and nothing else. Just for the sake of argument, suppose I agreed with you about these 'historic parallels'. What should we do to resolve them? Get rid of Bush? Is the answer that simple for you?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Get rid of Bush? Is the answer that simple for you?
Not in the least. I don't like the man, but I don't fool myself that he's the whole of the issue. I can't solve the problem. I'm not a political scientist, nor am I a charismatic revolutionary. I can see the damage that's happening though.
-
Craster wrote:
Ah - but wait. He's an arab, so why bother, eh?
Were he a blond haired blue eyed Jihadi asshole my indifference to his fate after being caught on the wrong side of a foreign conflict would be equal.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Get rid of Bush? Is the answer that simple for you?
Not in the least. I don't like the man, but I don't fool myself that he's the whole of the issue. I can't solve the problem. I'm not a political scientist, nor am I a charismatic revolutionary. I can see the damage that's happening though.
Here is something I do not understand. Why is it a 'fear tactic' to be concerned about Islamic terrorism and to make adjustments to deal with it, but it is not a fear tactic to characterize Bush as someone trying to turn the US into a 'fascist state' in order to achieve a left wing liberal agenda? Looked at rationally, which is really the most valid source of concern?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
I'm not talking about you, though. I'm talking about the US government's obligation to ensure that all its citizens are treated humanely - which it's currently ignoring.
Craster wrote:
all its citizens are treated humanely
Do you have evidence that he isn't? You don't think that being linked with Somali Islamists and captured by an ally as a POW warrants a different response (i.e on involving the military and intelligence services) than would be applied to someone suspected of domestic crimes?