Hate America?

[arnisador]

I acknowledge points on both sides...some people always find something about this country to criticize, and I also wonder why they don't find someplace they'd prefer to live. Yet, criticizing the administration is different from criticizing the country.

 

[Tgace]

Its not about the President to me. The President has always been "fair game". You cant deny the stream of national "anti-americanism" (at least thats how it seems. Even if its not true, a lot of people percieve it). Its about how when you say "America is the home of freedom" You get "Americans killed Indians, Interned Japanese yadda yadda". Make a comment about the bravery of American soldiers and the topic of prisoner abuse arises. WWII and liberating the world turns into Pax Americana. When you are enjoying the traditional American Christmas, people are having signs and decorations taken down. Religion...wont even open that can of worms. It never seems to end, the constant stream of "yeah buts...."

 

[Phoenix44]

Well, Tgace, I don't doubt that you run into people who say those things. But I've been pretty active in progressive causes in the past few years, and I associate with a lot of progressive individuals, and to us, it absolutely IS about the president and his administration.

We are concerned with Iraq, social security, independent news media, health care, privacy, deficits, open government, verifiable voting, accountability, sustainable energy, and education. My guess is that's the exact same stuff most people on the right are concerned with, too. I have never, not even once, heard anyone mention Indians, Japanese-American internment, or guns. Yeah, we criticize the Bush Administration plenty, but we're working very hard for what we see is a way to bring the country we love back on track. If we hated America, yeah, we would leave.

 

[Tgace]

Well good for you guy's. However the perception does exist. Is the left above introspection to try and figure out why that is? Are conservatives simply supposed to become more "openminded" and take some national responsibility for things our nation has done, but the left can just blame the "vast right wing conspiricy" and radio personalities for their decline? If they dont like the "Anti-American" label perhaps they need to become more openminded to why it exists.

 

[Tgace]

I guess the bottom line is all in the approach. My wifes problems with my bathroom habits get much more attention when they are discussed than when she starts screaming about what a slob I am. Sometimes those "discussions" can turn into yelling matches where we dig up all the old skeletons, but we at least try to start out each discussion as a civil one. The arguments that start out as "I am totally right and you are totally wrong" always turn ugly. And yes, I can acknowledge my role in those arguments.

Get my analogy here?

 

[Phoenix44]

I don't really get the analogy, but I will say this. When I discuss the Bush administration, the Iraq war, or any important issue with a person more to the "right" than I am, I expect a couple of things:

#1 Information. You are entitled to your opinion, but if you don't read the newspaper, you haven't heard of the 9/11 Commission, you don't know how many soldiers have died in Iraq, and you still believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and had WMD (when even Bush doesn't believe that anymore), then we probably have nothing to talk about.

#2 Spare me the platitudes and slogans. If I hear "Sudan offered Osama Bin Laden on a silver platter," or "Well what did Clinton ever do to prevent terrorism?" then #1 probably applies, and we probably have nothing to talk about.

#3 Never mind the epithets. My grandparents came over in steerage after they got booted out of the old country for being Jews. I'm hardly liberal "elite." And if you disagree with me, fine, but don't tell me what I'm saying is "bull****" or expect the conversation to be over.
I've actually had a few civil conversations with conservatives. We didn't agree with each other, but at least we had a command of the facts.

 

[Tgace]

Yep...I guess you dont get me.

 

[Flatlander]

Get my analogy here?

Just put the seat down when you're finished Tom, and you'll be fine. :ultracool

 

[Tgace]

:flushed:

 

[sgtmac_46]

I love my partner. I love my kids. I love myself. That doesn't mean we don't have any flaws or that we couldn't make ourselves better. There's a lot I love about America. I love the fact that I can criticize my government, and not be thrown in jail for it. I thought that this was the kind of freedom that makes America great. I don't get it...so we're supposed to have that freedom, and spread that freedom, and defend that freedom, and even die for that freedom, but we're not supposed to actually exercise that freedom, because that would mean we hate America???

Big difference between questioning administrations (I've done my share) and suggesting that America might be wrong on a topic, than celebrating anything anti-American, and giving any anti-American statement the benefit of the doubt no matter the reality.

I don't really get the analogy, but I will say this. When I discuss the Bush administration, the Iraq war, or any important issue with a person more to the "right" than I am, I expect a couple of things:

#1 Information. You are entitled to your opinion, but if you don't read the newspaper, you haven't heard of the 9/11 Commission, you don't know how many soldiers have died in Iraq, and you still believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and had WMD (when even Bush doesn't believe that anymore), then we probably have nothing to talk about.

First of all, this is a bit of misinformation and distortion. The idea that anyone EVER actually claimed Iraq was behind 9/11 is a strawman.

Iraq was about a decade of violated UN resolutions, continued aggression, a desire on Saddam's part to bribe his way out of sanctions and back in to building WMD AND a willing accomplice in the UN, France, Germany and Russia. Saddam was about unfinished business that should have been finished in 1991. Better late than never.

What's further more, virtually every single intelligence apparatus on the planet believed that Saddam continued to maintaint WMD. The fact that, in hind sight, none has been found does nothing to alter that fact. We don't make decisions based on what we will know in the future.

#2 Spare me the platitudes and slogans. If I hear "Sudan offered Osama Bin Laden on a silver platter," or "Well what did Clinton ever do to prevent terrorism?" then #1 probably applies, and we probably have nothing to talk about.

See, this is what i've been talking about. Now you've ventured well beyond any pretense of objective views, and in to the realm of pure partisanship. The Clinton administrations dealings with Osama Bin Laden took place over the course of nearly a decade. From WTC 1, in 1992 to the USS Cole, the Clinton administration treated Al-Qaeda as if it were a law enforcement problem. It was the ineptitude and mistakes in those dealings that lead to 9/11.

Those who desire to blame 9/11 on Bush have what you listed as #1 as a HUGE problem for several reasons, not the least of which was that the Bush administration had only been in officer for 8 months, while the planning for 9/11 took place over a period of more than 2 years. What's more, whenever Bush took over the White House, Bush had temporarily left numerous Clinton appointies in key intelligence positions, those included CIA direction George Tenet among many others. These men were trused by Clinton, they should have been able to be trusted under Bush.

#3 Never mind the epithets. My grandparents came over in steerage after they got booted out of the old country for being Jews. I'm hardly liberal "elite." And if you disagree with me, fine, but don't tell me what I'm saying is "bull****" or expect the conversation to be over.
I've actually had a few civil conversations with conservatives. We didn't agree with each other, but at least we had a command of the facts.

If you aren't the liberal elite, then you obviously aren't who the "Leftists hate America" comments are directed too. You also have no frame of reference to determine that those undermine America at every turn, really don't hate America. It is obvious that many truly do.

Simply disagreeing with specific policy is FAR DIFFERENT than the blanket statements that I hear from leftists all the time "Bush is a fascist", "We need a thousand Mogadishus", blah, blah, blah. I can deal with specific gripes in a reasonable manner. I respect disagreement. But there is no intelligence response to statements like the above, they just represent a general mindset that is based on the philosophy of blaming America first.

In fact, i've actually heard some moronic leftists actually make the claim that Dictatorships and Totalitarianism is no worse than Democracy. Now, do you call that intelligent, pro-American perspective? There seem to be two types of leftists:

1) Those that have specific gripes with America and how it's run
2) Those who's knee jerk reaction is a simply, all encompassing hatred for anything American and most especially for anything conservative.

Folks can pick which branch fits them the most.

 

[Tgace]

What's further more, virtually every single intelligence apparatus on the planet believed that Saddam continued to maintaint WMD. The fact that, in hind sight, none has been found does nothing to alter that fact. We don't make decisions based on what we will know in the future.

Hmmm like our own politicians did before we went in?

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Could find many more democrats who said similar things if needs be....they thought they were there too. they just didnt want to do anything signifigant about it.

 

[Makalakumu]

In the future, a democrat may be elected to office. What if this "hate america" rhetoric/stereotypes were turned around and pointed at conservatives? I suppose I could come up with long "lists" that could show it.. Yet, it would be the same as what we've been seeing above...BS. Perhaps its time we all start believing that some folks on the other side really are sincere respectable individuals...

 

[qizmoduis]

Sgtmac needs to stop beating that giant strawman he's constructed. Liberals are not defined by Rush Limbaugh and his followers, but you've bought into that shtick hook, line, and sinker.

I would suggest you tone down your vicious rhetoric and actually pay attention to what real liberals (not the nonexistent caricatures you foam about) are trying to tell you.

 

[MisterMike]

Sgtmac needs to stop beating that giant strawman he's constructed. Liberals are not defined by Rush Limbaugh and his followers, but you've bought into that shtick hook, line, and sinker.

I would suggest you tone down your vicious rhetoric and actually pay attention to what real liberals (not the nonexistent caricatures you foam about) are trying to tell you.

He hasn't had to create anything. Everything he's mentioned has been quite factual, and diversion tactics will never change that.

 

[Tgace]

Yes. Its easier to blame Rush and the right wing conspiracy though.

 

[qizmoduis]

He hasn't had to create anything. Everything he's mentioned has been quite factual, and diversion tactics will never change that.

Bull. Of course, I expect this kind of idiocy from you.

 

[qizmoduis]

Yes. Its easier to blame Rush and the right wing conspiracy though.

Can I help it if you guys constantly bleat lunatic right-wing talking points rather than facts? If you don't want to be confused with Rush and his ilk, then stop sounding like a dittohead.

 

[MisterMike]

Bull. Of course, I expect this kind of idiocy from you.

Yup - sucks going down in flames with your party eh?

 

[Phoenix44]

sgtmac 46: I wasn't arguing that *Bush claimed Saddam was responsible for 9/11.* I was arguing that many people I've tried to have an intelligent conversation with believe and espouse that view. According to a Harris poll conducted 2/2005, 47% of Americans believe that Saddam was involved in 9/11! My point is that in order for me to want to discuss Iraq policy, my basic requirement is that the person I'm talking to be a little better informed than that.

When you discuss people who "criticize everything that America does" or people who "hate America," why do you just assume that "liberals" in general feel that way, or that in some way, that's the definition of a "liberal"? As I mentioned, I've been active in liberal causes. I certainly don't "hate America," and neither do the other progressive people I associate with. We just don't agree with Bush policy.

 

[Tgace]

Can I help it if you guys constantly bleat lunatic right-wing talking points rather than facts? If you don't want to be confused with Rush and his ilk, then stop sounding like a dittohead.

Ahhh...so its how we "sound" thats important. Sounds like Rush is made out of straw.