...that's exactly the kind of attitude the 'international community' is sick and tired of ...

And sometimes, that "wise man" also gets his throat slit by his enemies.

As opposed to you spitting on it? Seems like that is a common phrase with you. Once again, I don't say that this place is perfect. It just happens to be the best one I can find, hence I am here. If it wasn't, I'd be there, where ever "there" might be. You, OTOH, seem to be constantly implying, from your posts, that only evil comes when the flag is raised. Therefore, my challenge to you is to find another place where only goodness gushes from it and let me know about it.

Might or Might not. Don't eat the menu.

As opposed to what? How welcoming are they to lesser people? Oh, they can talk the talk but when they have those issues, how loud do they scream?

The truth comes out....Your a F............

...Matt, you got to get a grip on yourself ... :smash:

...ok, ok, I should have said the term "bottom feeder" pi$$ed me off...

or

...zoologically speaking...if you don't know how to treat bottom feeders, you don't deserve, neither promise nor land ...

What..What ..What I say??

That would be an insult if you did not get a ban point for it and that picture is of Kirk Vining btw.

What are they sick of? Our immigration policy?

What I am saying is what I said: The history of the job indicates that most anybody who gets the job performs adequately. Adequately means good enough. The risk of dynastic families is tremendous. We could start with Egypt, work our way through Rome, jump to France, the Holy Roman Empire, Russia, Spain, England, Scotland, China, etc. Dynastic empires evolve into oppressive autocracies and often with bloody territorial expansionist policies.

Even if the country starts as a republic, as Rome began. The siezing of imperial power by Julius Caesar shifted the senate from an oligarchic balance of power among competing family interests to one-family total dominance. Thus to me, none o fthem were especially honorable men, but Julius betrayed the senate and people while Brutus and Cassius merely betrayed Caesar.

In contrast, democracies (using the term in it's loosest possible context) do not have a history of territorial expansionism (except for imperial Athens), do not oppress their people and generally look for accommodation to resolve conflict rather than force.

Even when poorly guided a democracy self-rights within an election cycle or two or three. Dynasties generally have required either bloody murder, abdication, or natural death for a change of policy. Those are rarely easy transitions.

I will take a mediocre or even less than mediocre candidate over a family dynasty.

What is a dynasty? Is it one or two or three or four? Or the possibility of many in the future but only a couple of them now? I don't know. I haven't a rule for that. I know that I will not vote for another Bush or Kennedy in a national election for at least a generation. I would consider voting for a Roosevelt now.

Gotta cear the pipes.

B

Got it.

I bring Rosa ParkS as an example how the Civil War didn’t solve the racial discrimination and inequity once and for all (as you have implied), you claim her as one of your (“white America”) own, I doubt the validity of that assertion and this makes me belittle her? Interesting perspective.
I have never declared that my birthplace was/is free of all social ills, but I also don't force it down on everybody's throath, with never ending devotion, that living in my country is the sollution to all that is wrong in this world.
I didn’t have to “claim” any of those mentioned social ills (cross burning, lynching, slavery, decaffeinated coffee, etc.), they are in your history books. I believe the term “race riots for years” is justified when talking about continuous riots spanning almost a decade. After the 80’s they were not connected to the civil rights movement, however some elements of society seem to have problems with the justice afforded to them in the best country in the world.
United States
Civil Rights and Black Power Movement's Period: 1955 - 1977
• 1964: Harlem, NY
• 1965: Watts
• 1966: Hough Riots, Cleveland, Ohio
• 1967: Detroit
• 1967: Newark
• 1968: Nationwide riots following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.
• 1969: York, Pennsylvania race riots
• 1970: Jackson State killings
• 1971: Camden, N.J. (1971) - Camden Riots
• 1972: Escambia High riots; Pensacola, Florida
Modern
• 1980: Miami riot
• 1980: Chattanooga riot
• 1992: Los Angeles riots:
• 2001: Cincinnati riots:
That is a rather sad statement made by a citizen of the greatest and most just society on Earth.
In a true democracy the will of the Vox Populi should peacefully prevail (while protecting minorities regardless of the democratic will of the people), it seems that this will was somewhat detrimental to the freedom of certain ethnic groups in the US, hence the black riots for nearly two centuries. I am not sure how Lincoln’s assassination ties in with King’s, unless you want to show that nothing has changed in 100 years because both were shot by racist white people.

I could never make such a claim; I don’t know the minds of all white people in America.
The slavery had “officially” ended after a war between two (mostly)white armies, subsequently laws were enacted to protect the rights of the minority, and white people were involved in the civil rights movement in the 60’s, so the answer is obvious. The slavery issue was brought into the argument to show that, in reality, the US was/is far from being just and equal to all.

I don’t have to, my contention was that as a member of a society as imperfect as the US is, you shouldn’t disparage another whose negative contribution to world peace could never even touch the enormity of the suffering caused by and continue to be caused by your country’s foreign policy.
And since it (the US) is the greatest hope for all man kind, it shouldn’t have to emulate anybody for, according to the statements made by president after president, it is the facto heaven on Earth.
If you had never owned one I am curious where the dislike is coming from. I have owned several Renaults, I found them very reliable and trustworthy, the same which can not be said about the Mercury Capri I had the misfortune of purchasing back in the very late 80’s (thinking what the h*ll, I should support the local economy). Your mileage may vary.
Yes, the constitution is an important safeguard of individual rights, even if it had to evolve, I never claimed otherwise. Of course it was influenced by ideas from that morally corrupt and uppity Europe, but it turned out to be a good piece of work nonetheless.

“Historical influences
In some instances historians disagree on the specific international influences on the overall development of the Constitution, possibly because of the large variety of sources that are available. Several of the ideas in the Constitution were new, and that a large number of ideas were drawn from the literature of republicanism, from the experiences of the 13 states, and from the British experience with mixed government. The most important influence from the European continent was from Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu. who emphasized the need to have balanced forces pushing against each other to prevent tryanny. (This in itself reflects the influence of Polybius' second century BC treatise on the checks and balances of the constitution of the Roman Republic). John Locke is known to be a mild influence, and the due process clause of the United States Constitution was partly based on common law stretching back to the Magna Carta of 1215.”

“Bill of Rights
The United States Bill of Rights were the ten amendments added to the Constitution in 1791, as the supporters had promised opponents during the debates of 1788. The English Bill of Rights (1689) was an inspiration for the American Bill of Rights. For example, both require jury trials, contain a right to bear arms, and prohibit excessive bail and of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Many liberties protected by state constitutions and the Virginia Declaration of Rights were incorporated into the United States Bill of Rights”
Actually, no. If you don’t like what I have to say, you have the option to use the ignore button, prove me wrong or conversely change the channel. What you don’ have the right here is to tell me where I should go.
I am not sure who “promised” you that land, but you did not “fight” and “win”, "slaughter" and "exterminate" would be the better choice of words.
Now would among those “bottom feeders”, “failures in their cesspool" included your ancestors as well, or just the people who came after you were born?
Or perhaps I completely misunderstood the meaning of that statement?
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
I read this a couple of years ago, on some island, on a statue given by that pesky, cheese munching, wine sucking, beret wearing, tricolor waiving Gallic Rooster, is it not there anymore?

Alex

This thread is going off the rails... :silly:

http://media.g4tv.com/images/blog/63...2372381444.jpg

..and will likely end in multiple infractions. ;) :D

No personal attacks, please and thank you. ;)

After reading your posts, dacia, I think you hate America more than anyone I know.

Sad.

Alex,

You began on this thread by making a good argument concerning one's perspective affecting one's view of history. Fine with me and we all need that reminder. Now you have progressed from providing a useful argument to defending an argument that is just ludicrous. Perspective is not the only argument about historical interpretation, it is simply the easiest to make. We have now reached the point where that argument always goes -- arguing which perspective is "true". And that is bull**it.

Monty Python recognized that both parties positions are stupid.

B