Remember today 12/7/1941... - Page 18 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

LaRondo · #**256** 12-14-2006, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

You mean a honkie-boy born on a reservation is a true American Indian but a genetic American Indian born in Westchester is just a honkie-boy?

You have missed about 80 years of litigation in the USA.

B

... A lot of things I missed in my life...but be assured my sincere thanks for contributing this aspect ...

LaRondo · #**257** 12-14-2006, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suginami

Anti-Americanism Is Racist Envy
Paul Johnson, 07.21.03, 12:00 AM ET

Anti-Americanism is the prevailing disease of intellectuals today. Like other diseases, it doesn't have to be logical or rational. But, like other diseases, it has a syndrome--a concurrent set of underlying symptoms that are also causes.

• First, an unadmitted contempt for democracy. The U.S. is the world's most successful democracy. The right of voters to elect more than 80,000 public officials, the length and thoroughness of electoral campaigns, the pervasiveness of the media and the almost daily reports by opinion polls ensure that government and electorate do not diverge for long and that Washington generally reflects the majority opinion in its actions.

It is this feature that intellectuals--especially in Europe--find embittering. They know they must genuflect to democracy as a system. They cannot openly admit that an entire people--especially one comprising nearly 300 million, who enjoy all the freedoms--can be mistaken. But in their hearts these intellectuals do not accept the principle of one person, one vote. They scornfully, if privately, reject the notion that a farmer in Kansas, a miner in Pennsylvania or an auto assembler in Michigan can carry as much social and moral weight as they do. In fact, they have a special derogatory word for anyone who acts on this assumption: "populist." A populist is someone who accepts the people's verdict, even--and especially--when it runs counter to the intellectual consensus (as with capital punishment, for example). In the jargon of intellectual persiflage, populism is almost as bad as fascism--indeed, it's a step toward it. Hence, the argument goes, the U.S. is not so much an "educated democracy" as it is a media-swayed and interest-group-controlled populist regime.

The truth is, on the European Continent there is little experience of working democracy. Italy and Germany have had democracy only since the late 1940s; Spain, since the 1960s. France is not a democracy; it is a republic run by bureaucratic and party elites, whose errors are dealt with by strikes, street riots and blockades instead of by votes. Elements of the French system are being imposed throughout the EU, even in countries such as Denmark and Sweden that have long practiced democracy with success. In a French-style pseudodemocracy, intellectuals have considerable influence, at both government and street levels. In a true democracy, intellectuals are no more powerful than their arguments.

• Second, anti-Americanism is a function of cultural racism. An astonishingly high proportion of European elites know very little about U.S. history or culture and even deny that they have a separate existence apart from their European roots. It is strange that those seeking to bring about a European federal state or union have at no stage sought to study the lessons Americans learned during the creation of the U.S. in the 1780s. After all, the U.S. Constitution (suitably amended) has lasted for more than 200 years, and within its framework the country has emerged as the richest and most powerful society in world history. You might think, therefore, that European elites would seek to learn something from such a successful process. Not at all: The view is that sophisticated, civilized Europe has nothing to learn from "adolescent" America. What these Euro-elites particularly abhor is the way in which the framers of the Constitution made every effort to involve the population through the process of public debates, town meetings and ratification votes--and this at a time when Europe was still governed (for the most part) by the absolute sovereigns of the ancien régime.

This cultural racism is particularly directed at the supposedly "know-nothing" President George W. Bush and his "gung ho" Texas background. The European intelligentsia gets its notion of America chiefly from Hollywood, TV soaps like Dallas and fiction. Few of them have any experience of America, outside of three or four big cities. Middle America is unexplored territory. The fact that the U.S. has proved a highly efficient crucible for melding different peoples into a human sum greater than its constituent parts is seen as a misfortune in Europe because it produces a cultural stew that lacks purity of any kind and is therefore at the mercy of commercial forces.

• Third, European elites tend to look at Americans as a subcivilized mass, whose function is to be obedient consumers in a system run by big business. The role of competition in U.S. economic life--and in every other aspect of life--is ignored, because competition is something Continental Europeans like to keep to a minimum and under careful control.

Although Americans are seen as highly materialistic consumers, they are also despised and feared for their spiritual interests, their participation in religious worship and their subscription to creeds of morality. Europeans see no inconsistency in their condemnation of the U.S. for being at one and the same time paganly unethical and morally zealous.

The truth is, any accusation that comes to hand is used without scruple by the Old World intelligentsia. Anti-Americanism is factually absurd, contradictory, racist, crude, childish, self-defeating and, at bottom, nonsensical. It is based on the powerful but irrational impulse of envy--an envy of American wealth, power, success and determination. It is an envy made all the more poisonous because of a fearful European conviction that America's strength is rising while Europe's is falling.

Paul Johnson , eminent British historian and author, Lee Kuan Yew , senior minister of Singapore, and Ernesto Zedillo , former president of Mexico, in addition to Forbes Chairman Caspar W. Weinberger , are now periodically writing this column. To see past Current Events columns go to www.forbes.com/currentevents.

...Horrible ...thank goodness, this is not America !!!

aklim · #**258** 12-15-2006, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Well, duh. Mr. Literal strikes again. The point of that quote is that sometimes a person is one's enemy for good reason. Most every great philosopher or savant has spoken some variation on the them that others often see our failings better than we do.

Your friends are less likely to point out your failings than are you enemies.

I wish I could have more reverence for how the flag has been displayed in the recent past. The notion that we're the greatest in the world is widespread (here anyway), and the flag was poorly used in Vietnam and Nicaragua in my lifetime. Perhaps not literally raised in Nicaragua but the country was bludgeoned in the service of US interests for decades, and then again by our patrons, the contras.

There is a great humbling ahead for this country and I don't think it's going to be pleasant. Going on as we speak, I'm afraid.

Huh?

There is always a reason. I for one, don't bother what what my enemies want or say. Destroy them first then go ponder what they mean. Kinda like smallpox. Now that we have wiped out all but a few vials, lets take them apart at this time and see what makes them tick and what we can use it for.

True friends will tell you your faults. I don't go telling my enemies how to make more money, get ahead in life, etc, etc. At least not without trying to slip something bad in it.

When you find the country that hasn't done any bad, let me know. As I have said before, it is not as if any country has lily white hands when you look deep down. They think so but others may not see that point of view. The only difference is that we do it and because we are bigger, it makes a bigger splash and gets more notice.

If that is the way you feel, go ahead and leave for someplace better. I did. Why can't you? Are you afraid that when you go to your Utopia you will find it has feet of clay and you would have to admit that you can't find it either and have to come crawling back? If you feel this is going down the toilet and that there is better out there, why stay here? I wouldn't. I took the oath of allegiance freely because I believed this was the best possible place. If I didn't, I wouldn't pledge myself to a country that I thought was going downhill. I'd work to find myself something better.

You might learn something or not. Don't believe everything you get from your enemies. You see a nice steak on the menu but that doesn't mean that is what you are going to eat.

aklim · #**259** 12-15-2006, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

This is one of my main concerns about our international conduct. Pride is seriously dangerous stuff and we're choking on it to some degree.

We, the US, are in somewhat of no-win position though. Other nations expect us to be the deep-pocketed aid-machine, and we do that to some degree -- such as after the Sunami -- but the same tools that enable us to offer that kind of aid are also the tools we use for warfare, in large part.

And, people do want to live here more than in their own country, fairly often. Some of that is just due to sheer wealth, but much is due to our legal system, where the little guy has much more opportunity to seek redress from some wrong, private or gub-mint, than is common in much of the world.

But then we tarnish our good features with mis-adventures like Vietnam or the current repeat in Iraq.

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. The US is good and bad. Hopefully enough people here can learn from our mistakes to move this thing forward.

Please tell me you read my post about the old man, boy and the donkey.

Why should we care one way or the other? Long as they have something to contribute, welcome to the party.

Again, why do we bother with this good features crap?

Every place is good and bad. The only thing a person needs to ask is "Does the good outweigh the bad, IMO?" If yes, stay. If no, leave foe someplace that does.

aklim · #**260** 12-15-2006, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Uno mas, read "The Nation," July 1, 1961, "Nicargaua: Another Cuba?" and splain to me why were right to prop up Somoza for decades and seek to utterly destroy the group that finally deposed him.

Why? The simplest of reasons. The reason why people do what they do. Because it was to our advantage.

cmac2012 · #**261** 12-15-2006, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Nah, I don't care to engage in yet another pointless exchange. You win.

My minor point was that what you posted was an opinion with which many people take exception.

Assertion, no matter the conviction we may hold, is not the same as truth. Doesn't mean you are wrong. Merely means there is no definitive proof of that assertion.

Definitive proof will be hard to come by for many points of discussion or disagreement. About the best we can hope for on a lot of this stuff is a relatively solid hypothesis.

The proof is in the pudding. We put the Sandinistas to rout, it is true. And now Ortega is back in power with more legitamacy. Latin America is heading left in a much bigger way than back in the 80s. Perhaps our heavy handed quashing of the neophyte experiment in Nic., hard on the heels of our support for a guy whose family could have given Saddam and boys a stiff contest in corrupt brutality dept. didn't sit well with many young Latin Am. thinkers, movers, and shakers.

And how badly has Vietnam fared in the interim? I've said nothing about the desperate gibberish that Bush was putting out during his trip there. "The lesson of VN is we'll succeed if we don't quit"....?????? Or something close to that. He also mentioned something about being in the country that "tormented us so" back in the day. Tormented us?!??

The man gives new breadth and dimension to "CLUELESS."

It's ironic that if the Goldwater solution that he favored had been implemented, it would have been far less likely, IMHO, that he would have been visiting a Vietnam which welcomed him, and one growing in leaps and bounds in the prosperity dept.

After our departure, rather than gleefully entering Red China's embrace, the VNese had to fight them off. They also put an end to Pol Pot and henchmen.

I fully believe that much of our current grief in Iraq stems from metaphysical as well as cause and effect lingering baggage from Vietnam. We didn't get it then and we've stepped in it again. Goodbye blood and treasure.

aklim · #**262** 12-15-2006, 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

And how badly has Vietnam fared in the interim? I've said nothing about the desperate gibberish that Bush was putting out during his trip there. "The lesson of VN is we'll succeed if we don't quit"....?????? Or something close to that. He also mentioned something about being in the country that "tormented us so" back in the day. Tormented us?!??

The man gives new breadth and dimension to "CLUELESS."

After our departure, rather than gleefully entering Red China's embrace, the VNese had to fight them off. They also put an end to Pol Pot and henchmen.

We did quit before we started in VN. If you are not going all out to win at any and all costs, you have quit before you started. I don't know where you were in the 70s but Asia was skittish about the flow of communism too. Some have even argued that with the slow down of the communists, it might have bought them time to prepare themselves and take care of the local elements who are sympathizers.

And yet none of the clued people are stepping up to the plate. I wonder why.

China didn't exactly cozy up to Russia either. The cooperated on many projects but as always, they wanted their brand of communism to remain. Yes, China is communist but they would also try put the moves on their weaker neighbor. Nothing new.

#**263** 12-15-2006, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

...the spectrum of Nativity is not limited to being incidently born and handed a passport ...

... On what reservation were you born or do you reside ...?

Harrah's Casino, I am moving to the Hard Rock next week.

#**264** 12-15-2006, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

Recognize your signature?

The content of a man's character is not where he stands in times of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."
-Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

No I don't my account was hacked.

There are many posts above for you to answer, so get to it. You have some splainin to do.

LaRondo · #**265** 12-15-2006, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MedMech

No I don't my account was hacked.

There are many posts above for you to answer, so get to it. You have some splainin to do.

... little note on the agency in charge ...

111,000 IMMIGRATION FILES LOST
TENS OF THOUSANDS GET CITIZENSHIP WITHOUT BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION

By James P. Tucker Jr.

An investigation by a government oversight agency recently revealed that in 2005 U.S. immigration authorities either “lost” or could not account for an estimated 111,000 files on immigrants to the United States, resulting in tens of thousands gaining citizenship without any indication as to whether authorities had checked to see if any of them had a criminal history.

The shocking loss was discovered in a study by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) sought by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). As many as 30,000 immigrants obtained citizenship with limited scrutiny as a result.

“In 2002, we had a person who was a threat to the United States that got citizenship and the file wasn’t even reviewed,” Grassley said on the Lou Dobbs TV show Dec. 4.

“How can this happen? Basic incompetence of paperwork or the fact that even paperwork exists as opposed to having this stuff on computer where it can be saved.”

There only has to be “one mistake” and the United States could again become a victim of terrorism, Grassley said, “A terrorist has to be right once,” he said. “We have to be right every time.”

Grassley was referring to an individual who received his U.S. citizenship and was a known supporter of the Lebanese militia group, Hezbollah, which the United States considers a terrorist organization. Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, the Netherlands and Israel also consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization. The rest of the world considers it a legitimate resistance organization that defends southern Lebanon from Israeli incursions.

“If they can’t handle legal immigration, how are they going to give amnesty to 12 million people that are here illegally?” Dobbs asked.

“A test on that will come next year when we have a debate on an amendment that there can’t be any guest worker programs or even any consideration of legalizing illegality if we don’t control the borders in the first place,” Grassley responded. “In other words, control the borders in the first place and then look at all these other issues as a next step.”

In a prepared statement issued earlier, Grassley said “It takes one missing file of somebody with links to a terrorist organization to become an American citizen. A terrorist can be unsuccessful thousands of times, but we have to be perfect all the time. We can’t afford to be handing out citizenship with blinders on.”

The 30,000 missing files represent about 4% of the 715,000 total applications handled by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in 2005. The CIS is an agency within the Department of Homeland Security. The files, known as “A files,” contain information such as arrest warrants and the results of immigration proceedings. The losses can be attributed to “poor training” and “a lack of emphasis by managers,” the report said.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.), who also called for the investigation, observed that some of the 9-11 hijackers entered the country legally, disappearing until the terrorist attacks.

She called it “unthinkable” that the U.S. immigration system could still grant citizenship to a potential terrorist “simply because they can’t find a person’s file.”

CIS officials told auditors that case adjudicators are not required to document whether they use A files. This means some of the 30,000 could have been reviewed but they don’t know. Auditors recommended CIS tell employees to note whether an A file was used to adjudicate an application—something any clerk-typist would recommend.

(Issue #51, December 18, 2006)