Hate America?

[Tgace]

This guy pulls no punches...

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_philosophy/hate_america.htm
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_philosophy/hate_america_2.htm

George M. Haddad has a Bachelors Degree in Sociology and a Masters Degree in Social Administration with extensive work experience with the mentally ill. The former Executive Director - National Institute for Burn Medicine - affiliated with the University of Michigan. He is retired from the National Staff of the YMCA as a troubleshooter in financial management and administration and has worked as a management consultant to non-profit corporations. He has written frequently on medical, social and political issues and has many published articles to his credit.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Guy has a very slanted view of things...seems to believe that disagreeing with the government is wrong.

I've found that our founding fathers had a different view of such activities. But, what would Jefferson and Franklin know abuot such things.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Guy has a very slanted view of things...seems to believe that disagreeing with the government is wrong.

I've found that our founding fathers had a different view of such activities. But, what would Jefferson and Franklin know abuot such things.

Kind of depends on the situation. If a democrat was president, this guy would be the dissident. During the Clinton administration, people who thought this way about Leftists were considered kooks and wackos and labelled as dangerous. Now the shoes on the other foot, leftists are all PRO-dissent. Funny how politics does that when the opposition becomes the party in power.

 

[Tgace]

I believe its important for the Democrats to really look at why they have been loosing power and elections lately. While yeah, this guy is extreme, why do the Dems really believe they have been slipping? Dont tell me they really believe its all a "vast right wing conspiracy"? I also believe the Republicans really need to look at their association with far right Christian groups and re-evaluate their stance on economics and the environment if they want to maintain their power. IMO each group is just going where they think there are votes more than where they really stand on these issues. Which is predictable being politicians. Everybody needs to take a step towards the middle IMO.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I believe its important for the Democrats to really llok at why they have been loosing power and elections lately. While yeah, this guy is extreme, whay do the Dems really believe they have been slipping? Dont tell me they really believe its all a "vast right wing conspiracy"? I also believe the Republicans really need to look at their association with far right Christian groups and re-evaluate their stance on economics and the environment if they want to maintain their power. IMO each group is just going where they think there are votes more than where they really stand on these issues. Which is predictable being politicians. Everybody needs to take a step towards the middle IMO.

No, they really believe it's a vast-right wing conspiracy. In their minds they've been winning the elections, but the Republican's have been cheating. Honest self-evaluation is beyond many of them.

 

[Shaolinmack]

no offence intended, but I have my issues and opinions about amarica.. Not the people who live there per-say but the governing members who would stupe so low as to try to politicaly brainwash the world with there theorys of terrorism and national sucurity. "The attacks on our President and on the present government leadership by the Elitist democrats and liberal news media is far in excess of their concern relative to bringing Hussein, al Qaeda and the Taliban to heel. In the surge for power our own president is regarded as a worse enemy than the terrorists. This is what constitutes the democrat party of today. It is only a shell of what was once substantive, strong, valued and honorable" True cuz the man invades a country That His father attacked Without a decloration of war and he also violated every ruel of ingagment set forth to save civilian lives. not to mention the counless Crimes of war he commits that in the last century we exicuted German solders for.
I find it hard to beleve that bushes agenda involves saving anyones life. but im of topic and i dont feel i should push my political belefs on anyone. but http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ i find it informative.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The Democrats lose because they are both out of touch and unable to cheat as well as the Republicans. The Republicans win because they are out of touch and can cheat better than their opponents.

Ironically enough, both parties are only seperated by a thin line, and some sound bytes, and have switched fence sides at least once in the last 50 years.

Personally, I think both parties should be abolished, and we see how the 3rd parties can do. Course I also think I should be king, and we just know that won't happen either.

 

[Tgace]

Well.."cheating" may give an edge but only when its a close race. Why is it such a close race? The Dems. had a hold on power for a long stretch. Why has it become so close now? They need to re-evaluate themselves.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Well, you had 12 years Republican (Reagan 8 yrs, Bush 4), 8 yearn Democrat (Clinton) now 8 years Republican (Bush II).

The question here is, will Bush get a 3rd term (supposedly illegal, but with all the hidden crap in all those unread laws they pass, who knows), or more likely, is there a leader in either party who can step forward for the next election? Hillary Clinton is pushed as the possible Dem, but I'd rather vote for my cat than her. Cheney won't run. Too old, Too ill. Who else is there? The normal (ie last few elections) procedure is for the VP to try and follow the P after 8 yrs, so Cheney's inability to follow W2 opens a hole that the Dems can try to slip through. Again though, I don't see a real contender in either party at this time.

 

[sgtmac_46]

no offence intended, but I have my issues and opinions about amarica.. Not the people who live there per-say but the governing members who would stupe so low as to try to politicaly brainwash the world with there theorys of terrorism and national sucurity. "The attacks on our President and on the present government leadership by the Elitist democrats and liberal news media is far in excess of their concern relative to bringing Hussein, al Qaeda and the Taliban to heel. In the surge for power our own president is regarded as a worse enemy than the terrorists. This is what constitutes the democrat party of today. It is only a shell of what was once substantive, strong, valued and honorable" True cuz the man invades a country That His father attacked Without a decloration of war and he also violated every ruel of ingagment set forth to save civilian lives. not to mention the counless Crimes of war he commits that in the last century we exicuted German solders for.
I find it hard to beleve that bushes agenda involves saving anyones life. but im of topic and i dont feel i should push my political belefs on anyone. but http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ i find it informative.

The distortions of reality present in this post boggle the mind. By the way, i've already debunked a great deal of what's on "whatreallyhappened.com", so I won't rehash that, except to say it's more smoke and mirrors than it claims Bush's evidence was. I think the authors need to remember to take their seroquel in the future...or remember the aluminum foil.

The Democrats lose because they are both out of touch and unable to cheat as well as the Republicans. The Republicans win because they are out of touch and can cheat better than their opponents.

Ironically enough, both parties are only seperated by a thin line, and some sound bytes, and have switched fence sides at least once in the last 50 years.

Personally, I think both parties should be abolished, and we see how the 3rd parties can do. Course I also think I should be king, and we just know that won't happen either.

Don't sell the Democrats short, they cheat very well. In fact, they actually cheat far better than Republicans are capable of. Many Republicans are confined by a quaint, anachronistic phenomenon known as morality. Many leftists aren't subject to that same weakness. As Lenin said, "There is no objective truth, except that which serves the party". Truer words were never spoken by a leftist.

The reason Democrats lose is arrogance. They are so confident in their ability to brainwash the great masses, that they've gotten lazy. They think that all they need is class and race warfare soundbites to win. They are shocked when that isn't enough.

 

[Tgace]

Well, you had 12 years Republican (Reagan 8 yrs, Bush 4), 8 yearn Democrat (Clinton) now 8 years Republican (Bush II).

The question here is, will Bush get a 3rd term (supposedly illegal, but with all the hidden crap in all those unread laws they pass, who knows), or more likely, is there a leader in either party who can step forward for the next election? Hillary Clinton is pushed as the possible Dem, but I'd rather vote for my cat than her. Cheney won't run. Too old, Too ill. Who else is there? The normal (ie last few elections) procedure is for the VP to try and follow the P after 8 yrs, so Cheney's inability to follow W2 opens a hole that the Dems can try to slip through. Again though, I don't see a real contender in either party at this time.

I was referring to the Senate and Congress where the real power to make change in this country is.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4196936

A: Since the advent of the current two-party system, the longest period of Democratic control of Congress was between 1954, when they captured both chambers, until 1980, when they lost the Senate to the GOP. Republicans didn't win back the House until 1994, and that 40-year period of control is the longest any party has been in the majority of either the House or Senate.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Well, you had 12 years Republican (Reagan 8 yrs, Bush 4), 8 yearn Democrat (Clinton) now 8 years Republican (Bush II).

It's a little more complicated than that. Reagan never had a majority of congress, that has only occurred since 1994. Further, for several decades previous, Democrats dominated Congress and, for the most part, the presidency, with a few notable exceptions.

The question here is, will Bush get a 3rd term (supposedly illegal, but with all the hidden crap in all those unread laws they pass, who knows), or more likely, is there a leader in either party who can step forward for the next election? Hillary Clinton is pushed as the possible Dem, but I'd rather vote for my cat than her. Cheney won't run. Too old, Too ill. Who else is there? The normal (ie last few elections) procedure is for the VP to try and follow the P after 8 yrs, so Cheney's inability to follow W2 opens a hole that the Dems can try to slip through. Again though, I don't see a real contender in either party at this time.

"will Bush get a 3rd term " Come on, Bob, you don't even believe that.

 

[Tgace]

That is a little "tin hat" Bob.

 

[Tgace]

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=8061

Read the whole thing, but heres a piece.

Every loss is the fault of outside forces instead of the candidates and their messages. Elections are stolen, they are bought by special interests, or they are manipulated by sneaky, conniving Republicans who have become experts at pulling the wool over voters’ eyes. The Democratic Party is apparently suffering from a mirror shortage. There’s no other way to explain their cluelessness as to whom to blame for the electoral realignment in America.

And so they go on and on about a majority party which has the temerity to govern according to the precepts which made it a majority party in the first place. They rant about the lack of bipartisanship as if they had cornered the market on olive branches, while spouting some of the most partisan bile heard in Washington in decades. And, as they become more wild-eyed and maniacal, they turn off more and more voters who can only figure out what they’re against (anything President Bush is for) while wondering what they’re in favor of (other than returning them to power). The Democrats are simply not a viable alternative for most “centrists”.

It’s a vicious circle that promises to keep the GOP in a majority position for a long time to come. I suppose that’s good news for Republicans. But it’s still painful to watch.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Regarding a 3rd term for Bush, there have been attempts to remove the 2 term limit, the most recent vote was alot closer than folks believe. Given that the election is still some time away, it would not surprise me to see another motion pushed through to remove that limit before then. Especially given the current balance in the government, though W's continuing losses in popularity may make it a hard sell.
http://www.mapcruzin.com/news/bush050703a.htm
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.J.RES.11.IH:
(democratic attempt during Clinton admin) This was a dual attempt to repeal the 22nd admendment.)

Current status:

H.J.RES.11
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
Sponsor: Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 3/6/2004 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.]/quote]

As to the rest, I forgot about Congress in the equation. You gents are correct. Though I do disagree on the idea of Republicans being moral, but thats a different debate.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=8061

Read the whole thing, but heres a piece.

I think that's a good part of it. The Republican party as a whole is alot more solid than the Democrats. In the last election, I found myself in alot more agreement with the Republicans than I expected. I still voted Libertarian though, since that party was the one that fit my own viewpoints best.

I'd have loved to see a real debate with the other 3 parties, Green, Libertarian and whatever Nader was doing that week.

 

[Tgace]

I also believe the Reps. are acquiring the majority of Governorships and an increasing number of state legislatures as well. The Dems. have to really take a look at why and not get mired down in the "cheating" and various other excuses. People are voting Republican. Why?

 

[psi_radar]

Most of us on MT are Americans, and for the most part, we all love our country. It's our home. How can any of us hate it? Perhaps we hold a different vision of what it should be, which is our right. And I am ashamed right now.

The discussion of this topic is justified if you think blind support of your leaders is a requirement of patriotism. The links provided are crap. His arguments are completely inane and unsubstantiated. For example, he blames Dems for not doing enough to fight communism or commit enough forces in Vietnam. Um. Dems started the fight, erroneously or not, and Nixon, a Republican, didn't turn it around. And a lot of our current administration was directly involved (ironic? I think so). It was a bi-partisan failure.

Today, Democrats aren't saying much besides deriding the current administration, which is awfully tempting since it's so abominable. They need to step up and provide real solutions rather than just trying to go for the jugular of the Neo-con government.

I'm a libertarian, but last election I voted all democrat nationally because, really, anything would be better than we have right now, and I figured they had more of a chance than my party of choice. Since the Bush cabal is lame duck, I'll reconsider my vote next time. I'd love to see McCain in the White House.

I challenge anyone to state exactly why opposing the current administration would be unamerican. The problems I have with it are as follows:

The tax schemes favor the rich, reduce revenues, and have decreased upward mobility in our country.

Neglect of research into alternative means of energy and tax breaks for larger business vehicles (6000 pounds+) heightens gas use and further entrenches the aging oil economy. (And gee, how many of the current cabinet have oil ties. I've seen a model of the Condaleeza oil tanker. Nice ship.)

The War On Terror, whoops, I mean the War Against Extremism, is tapping resources we could use at home for TRUE security.

The War on (whatever) actually increases proliferation of terrorist training and active cells throughout the globe.

We haven't caught Osama. But I guess that just doesn't matter any more. Especially if you're buds with his family.

They lied about the Iraqi threat. 200 billion of our dollars and counting. 2000 American lives, some because they were improperly equipped. Untold innocent Iraqi lives, at least 20,000 reported by major news outlets, probably many more. And we got all upset about those 10,000 Kurds Saddam gassed. Child's play. Bring our guys home, many of whom have lost jobs, linbs, and their sanity already.

There are others, like stem cell research. My dad has Parkinson's. Deficient health care. My son is autistic.

Is it so unamerican to say, let's stop, take a look, and consider a new tack?

I'll wave the flag again when I'm proud.

 

[Tgace]

Questioning our leaders is as American as you can get. However the perception of a "blame/hate America first" policy in the Dem. party is what turned me away from the party years ago. Long before W's administration. Id feel safe to say that they could probably gain back many members if they attempted to address that issue.

If you require having your way on all those various issues in order to be "proud again" you might as well burn the Flag you have. Im proud of my country even when I disagree with its leaders. Im as partiotic now as I was under Clinton. An opinion I have of Libs is that they always seem to have some issue that keeps them from being proud of their country. Im not holding my breath.

 

[psi_radar]

Questioning our leaders is as American as you can get. However the perception of a "blame/hate America first" policy in the Dem. party is what turned me away from the party years ago. Long before W's administration. Id feel safe to say that they could probably gain back many members if they attempted to address that issue.

I don't think Dems equate hating America with their issues with our administration. They are, after all, part of the same machine. I do agree with you that they lack a true voice and identity in policy or solutions.

If you require having your way on all those various issues in order to be "proud again" you might as well burn the Flag you have. Im proud of my country even when I disagree with its leaders. Im as partiotic now as I was under Clinton. An opinion I have of Libs is that they always seem to have some issue that keeps them from being proud of their country. Im not holding my breath.

How the hell is the unwillingness to wave the flag equate to the desire to burn it? I slept under one for many years, which is probably illegal. I love what our country stands for, which is far removed from its actions since 2003. Our leaders represent America. We voted them in. We are responsible, to the world, and ourselves. I love America, but this is a dark time. I won't be complicit in actions I know to be wrong.

I don't like what we're doing to others and ourselves.