RE: I'm for America

RE: I'm for America (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 11:54:41 AM)
I'm a Norwo-American. So I favor hyphenization.

DesideriScuri -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 12:14:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam The title is one reason I detest all this "Hyphenated-American" bullcrap. What ever happened to American Americans? Does that make you an "anti-ethnicist" then?!? lmao I understand where you are coming from, and agree to a point. Some people like to include their heritage, genealogy, or descendant ties with their nationality. I am very proud to have come from Italian stock (and German), but will never be ashamed of being American, hyphenated or not. One of the issues, however, is that there are a shit ton of "Americans." There are two continents that contain people who could legitimately call themselves "Americans." Yes, when someone states they are from America, it is overwhelmingly taken as, "I am from the United States of America." However, Candians, Mexicans, Venezuelans, Argentinians, and a whole slew of other countries's citizens can claim to be "American." Anyone who can trace their roots back to the Incans or Mayans could legitimately call themselves Native Americans, just as the "indians" are called Native Americans in the USA. I am proud to be an "American." I am also proud to call the Italians and Germans ethnic "motherlands." Is it horrible that some appreciate their lineage, rather than just where they were born? I'm 3rd generation Italian on my Dad's side, 4th generation Italian on my Mom's side, and 3rd generation German on my Mom's side. Am I any less American because I appreciate Italy and Germany more than any country outside the USA?

vincentML -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 1:54:54 PM)
quote: lol Its not a mystery to me, but its why I see the US as a country divided and a country with no real direction.. and that is not likely to change any time soon.. If you look at our history you will find that this is the way big changes have always happened in the USA. Through crisis and strain. It just takes us a while to sort it out but change is happening.

MrRodgers -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 2:33:23 PM)
Well, I am Irish American but hold no special love for Ireland as it was themselves and the British who set their fate as they say...back in the day. My single largest problem in most all forums is the public subscribing to changes in the meaning of words and if allowed long enough, it becomes a 'new' meaning, accepted as the real meaning. I am 'for' America and its original ideas but have seen during my lifetime a complete change in its values and direction. It is thus that I have learned that neither Ireland or America are superior or that I am...just because my family originated from or I was born in one. (making me and all like me...a native American BTW) It would then be thus that ALL people could argue say I am 'for' China (if born there) nevermind its govt. horrendous human rights problem and [its] corrupt values. I come to the net and these blogs, watch 'political' TV and read a whole lot less then I used to because it has been reduced to discovering how so much disinformation has taken hold which renders argument fruitless. Otherwise I come to blogs like this to burst bubbles and generally give people shit over their ignorance. Not much time left and so much work to do.

PeonForHer -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 3:54:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven We're all for America. The problem is when we see our own vision of America as the only viable model. I just don't think that there are enough political visions with popular currency in the USA, Steven. In most of Europe there are mainstream traditions of political outlook that, by and large, people accept as being somewhere between far left and far right. One-Nation Tories aren't seen as the same as Thatcherites; Social Democrats aren't bracketed under 'socialists'. The UK Liberal party is based on ideas of modern liberalism rather than the 'muscular, hard New Right' sort of liberalism of Thatcher and Reagan. I have a feeling that my suggested solution would run as counterintuitive to that of most Americans who'd love to sort out the maelstrom that American political culture appears to be today. I wouldn't promote a call to love other Americans - in fact, I wouldn't promote a call to anything so feeling- and emotion- bound, rather than cool-headed and reason-based. Americans already know how to love, to feel joy and to shed tears. It's a wonderful trait, and I admire it. But it is absolutely not the answer to everything. In fact, it can turn into a bloody nightmare so easily, and already has, many, many times. What Americans collectively don't seem to grasp is just how seamlessly such good and admirable things can flip to evil things. How many times, for instance, has love of 'everything and everyone American' been flipped over to become hatred of whatever is currently deemed to be 'Non American'? A contented individual may well be one who is able to feel strongly, in many respects. Passion may well be admirable in Mr X or Ms Y. But a contented society and polity doesn't work the same way as an individual. It needs to be organised by cool-headedness and balance. A computer operating system needs to be organised in a resolutely logical and scientific way. And a society is a million times more complex than any computer operating system. A bit less hugging, kissing and tears - but also a bit less murdering of whoever is the latest 'demon'. Worth a thought, no?

Politesub53 -> RE: I'm for America (8/22/2012 4:48:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic FR... I really am enjoying your posting OttersSwim While I am just hot and juicy........LoL

hot4bondage -> RE: I'm for America (8/23/2012 7:24:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Well, right now it's an R/R/R divide, with the rightest of the rights trying to assert both its power and the perception that its the entire party. Ironic, given the very wide range among Democrats, from quite conservative to quite progressive. Presenting that as a single "D" is a huge myth. there are only those 2 choices (R or D) in the voting booth.. Another huge myth. Libertarians are on every ballot in this election.

Musicmystery -> RE: I'm for America (8/23/2012 7:27:30 AM)
Really. Who's the Libertarian candidate for president on 51 ballots?

hot4bondage -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 7:31:37 AM)
Ok, I jumped the gun. The Libertarian ticket--Governor Johnson/Judge Gray--is (only?) up to 38 ballots so far. They still expect to get on every ballot in time. Their quest has led to some interesting developments in Michigan and Washington state. There's actually a different Gary Johnson on the Michigan ballot, and it appears that Romney didn't earn a spot on the Washington ballot. Anyway, my point is that most if not all US voters will see three choices on their ballot. You don't have to choose between Obamney and Rombama.

Hillwilliam -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 7:35:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hot4bondage Ok, I jumped the gun. The Libertarian ticket--Governor Johnson/Judge Gray--is (only?) up to 38 ballots so far. They still expect to get on every ballot in time. Their quest has led to some interesting developments in Michigan and Washington state. There's actually a different Gary Johnson on the Michigan ballot, and it appears that Romney didn't earn a spot on the Washington ballot. Anyway, my point is that most if not all US voters will see three choices on their ballot. You don't have to choose between Obamney and Rombama. I just wish they had a chance in hell of winning. [image]local://upfiles/664494/08739A8684F448C2A5AEA28AD4068E02.jpg[/image]

tj444 -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 7:53:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I just wish they had a chance in hell of winning. thats the point.. it doesnt matter even if someone else is on the ballot,.. when people get in that voting booth and its decision time, they will pick either the D or the R, there is no real other choice.. and imo its not going to be a "I'm for America" thing.. its a "I will vote this way to keep Obama/Romney out" kinda thing..

OttersSwim -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 8:04:37 AM)
You know, when I picked that topic name, I really meant that I wanted people to stop thinking only on party lines and start thinking about what is actually good for our country and voting in that direction, regardless of who (person or party) was on the ballot. Seems that folks are taking it the wrong way.

Hillwilliam -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 8:08:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OttersSwim You know, when I picked that topic name, I really meant that I wanted people to stop thinking only on party lines and start thinking about what is actually good for our country and voting in that direction, regardless of who (person or party) was on the ballot. Seems that folks are taking it the wrong way. Is either 'party' good for the country? Maybe that's why the Libertarians came up.

tj444 -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 8:09:14 AM)
I know that is what you wanted, and its really cute, it really is, to have that kinda childlike innocence & idealism.. but thats not what happens in real life.. just sayin'

DesideriScuri -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 12:38:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OttersSwim You know, when I picked that topic name, I really meant that I wanted people to stop thinking only on party lines and start thinking about what is actually good for our country and voting in that direction, regardless of who (person or party) was on the ballot. Seems that folks are taking it the wrong way. Here is the problem that you are not exactly getting. The Democrats and the Republicans are doing what they think best. Strip away all the rhetoric and bullshit claims (Paul Ryan wants to push Grandma off a cliff!!!) and we come down to reality. Nobody wants someone to die from malnutrition. No one wants someone to go without heat or air conditioning. No one wants someone to be homeless. Nobody wants someone to not be able to get health care (and nobody wants someone to not be able to afford it). The only difference between the two parties, is in how we get to those goals. The Republicans tend towards personal responsibility and the Democrats tend towards Government solutions. If you think Government is good and can be the provider of all for all, then, why would you not push for that and resist attempts to either pull back from that or to repeal it? If you think the responsibility of the people is to take care of themselves and others, then why would you support a government program where personal responsibility should be able to provide? We have two almost completely opposed views of government and how to get what is best for the country. That is why we have gridlock and bickering.

Hillwilliam -> RE: I'm for America (8/24/2012 12:51:39 PM)
DS, I disagree. I don't think they're doing what they think is best. I think they are doing what will obtain, maintain and solidify power. They want lots of goodies for themselves and their cronies and fuck everyone else. If it leads to utter ruin of the country in a few decades well "I got mine, fuck y'all".

hot4bondage -> RE: I'm for America (8/25/2012 7:18:01 AM)
DS, when we use parties to delineate those two opposing philosophies, we tend to overlook social conservatives and war hawks. They favor government "solutions" and they are prevalent in both parties.

DesideriScuri -> RE: I'm for America (8/25/2012 1:02:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hot4bondage DS, when we use parties to delineate those two opposing philosophies, we tend to overlook social conservatives and war hawks. They favor government "solutions" and they are prevalent in both parties. I understand your points, and don't completely disagree, but we have a 2-party system. Take it or leave it. It isn't going to be changing any time soon, unfortunately. And, my points were generalities. "War hawks" isn't an applicable term when you look at domestic policy. Foreign policy, yes, but not domestic. "Social Conservatism" doesn't really distill down to one party or the other. Yes, the Republican Party is more socially conservative, but that's not as "Big Government" as one might think. That's more of a "Here are the rules. Fucking follow them." style of law. That isn't necessarily taking from one and giving to another.

DesideriScuri -> RE: I'm for America (8/25/2012 1:04:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam DS, I disagree. I don't think they're doing what they think is best. I think they are doing what will obtain, maintain and solidify power. They want lots of goodies for themselves and their cronies and fuck everyone else. If it leads to utter ruin of the country in a few decades well "I got mine, fuck y'all". When you strip the crony capitalism, pay to play, and reciprocal back scratching from both parties, you are left with pretty much what I stated. While both parties are full of elected officials guilty of paying more attention to their re-election efforts, they still do so in a way that is at least fairly consistent with their party platform.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.2192383