Stand up and say Hell Yes!

Whether it be liberals, conservatives, right wing, left wing, republican, democrats, aunt may, wendy's, mcdonalds, etc., everyone and anyone has had there part to play in the resposibility of the decay of America.

regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
everyone and anyone has had there part to play in the resposibility of the decay of America.

In my opinion, America hasn't decayed.
It's waking up.

A country that has a population made up of people from all over the world is finally discovering the rest of the world.

You Yanks spend too much time in self contemplation and hating your own society, when instead you should be far more worried about other countries.
You know the basic moral values of man. You know what is right and what is wrong.
But there is outrage amongst your people if you ever try to put those evils wrong elsewhere. You feel fear yet you skim over the fact that other people in other countries fear their own system and the outside world a helluva lot more than you do. Most of the time THEIR fear is justified.

You need to realise that you aren't any different from the rest of us. No better and no worse.

Governments come and go. People will always be there.

I also agree Leveller but I was saying it that way because thats the way that a few that have posted on this thread...Jedi for one, keeps refering it to....'decay'.

Thanks.

regards
seekerof

Maddas, gangtsa rap and Eminem are immoral as Hitler was evil. It teaches kids bad things, like drugs and language I would never let my kids listen to Eminem. 50 Cent was a former crak dealer, they are all in drugs.
Quote from JediMaster.

Really like your children wont find out about this stuff at school or university.

What are you really saying?, are the American people so gulliable and impressionable that a few foulmouth rappers are able to pervert there minds into believing that there lyrics are to be taken seriously.

Like what William said about the rock and roll that the generation of the 60s and 70s, Bob Dylan, Cat Stevens, The Doors,The Rolling Stones, Eric Clapton etc timeless artists. But, all these people sang about sex, drugs and the darker side of society.

Really, pull your head from out of your arse and smell the roses. Much of the Music and Art that you enjoy was created by alcoholics, druggies, hippies and low lifes. Wrapping your children in cotton wool and censoring what they can watch and listern to will only give them reason to rebel not to mention make it easier for them to do so. But this is America's problem isnt it. Redneck born ignorance.

But did young boys in third grade who listend to that call young girls bithces and ho's??? No, they were rebels these days kids are animals. Its mainly the ones whop have poor parents, and a bad upbringing.

I agree that the kids more likely to me influenced by rap music are the ones with poor parents and bad upbringings. I have two children myself. My oldest boy is four and has already listerned to eminem, Korn, Rage against the machine etc, because these are the types of music I listen to but he does not swear or disrespect his mother, neither do I for that matter. I got my first rap album NWA when I was 12 yrs old (It had a parental advisory sticker) but I was not influenced to be a gansta nor did I take the lyrics seriously.

You are right rap music and the Media are not to blame for the decay of American values, albiet a small part maybe. Stating that they are is just passing the buck to hide the real problem. Which is really the attitude presented in the email from your uncle. The attitude shows a complete lack of understanding, leading to hate and ignorance causing segregation. leading to under educatated foul-mouthed rappers and other sorts.

Yes keep your tax dollars from going to the poor neighborhoods, and the deprived, spend it on your big cars, boats, houses, golf courses, country club and in your fancy yuppy bars. Let the poor get even poorer. Let them resort to stealling, selling drugs and prostituting themselves out to feed their families. See how there children drop out of schools at young ages due to drug addiction, teen pregnancy and the lure of gang life. Yes, keep building jails to house their fathers and brothers, keep putting biggoted white police out on the streets to brutally bash them when they walk to the shop to by bread.
Yes and then blame the liberals for what America has become. You fools.

Originally posted by JediMaster
Ah come on. If I think being a homo is immoral am I a homophobe? I dont want any homo around my kids, I dont hate them, but I'd rather straight people around them.

You know it as well as I do. If there is an all white thing Ggod forbid! If that prom in Georgia was all black it would not have gotten all of that attention.

I can spank my kid if I want, lets them learn life better.

According to the FBI 82% of all serious crime is commited by black men. Is this racist?

Where to begin? While I share to some extent some of the sentiments of the original post I wonder if you realize that Black people in the U.S. constitute about 22 million out of 280. There are those who say 22 is going to take over 280. Why no outrage for any other minority that has centro- ethinc programs or activities, i.e. festivals/radio/tv et al?
If you were one of two in a locked room with 28 others of a totally different make up, would you gravitate to the other like yourself, or would you go to those who were different from you?
Minority means lacking numbers. In a sense it is tribal to stick together, not inherinately racist be ye whatever color. It galls me when people use that argument to find some kind of sympathy for the Majority. I am American of mixed descent (German, Ghanian,Dutch and Cherokee; all traced) and I think people can join whatever the hell club /program they want. The few have so little political power they must use whatever other legitamate means to gain power to give voice to views........out.

Well...not being from America...I couldn't give a flying fig...as long as ya keep it on your side of the ocean, its all good...

OK, Leveller, I think I'll be allowed a little time to play on the net, now. I allowed everyone to beat me at putt-putt golf yesterday, so I've bought some time!

Your first point is well-taken, that is not enough information to base one's voting. It is more information most people use, nowadays, though.
After all, look at Buchanan. Sometimes he makes alot of sense, and he could have easily wrote that editorial. A few minutes later, though, he could have easily demanded the letter "M" be stricken from the alphabet!

Your second point, that all of us would like to have luxury items, misses the point, at least how I view it and I think the author views it as well. There are some who would begrudge us of such items as they think it is wasteful and while some are not suceeding, it is unfair that those who have busted their butts to achieve their wants as well as their needs should acquire them. There is where the problem enters the arena.

Whether or not someone gives to charity is up to them, Leveller. People have the choice to give and what charity to donate. It is nobody else's right to take my money and give it to someone else. That is called stealing. I'm tired of groups, trying to take my money to operate their agendas. I give and I give plenty to those I feel is right. I assume you do the same. As far as those who misstep and find themselves on hard times, I hope they have a network of friends, church and family to help them back on their feet.

There is nothing wrong with the first line of the gun argument which states guns don't make you a killer. It is, after all, simply a hunk of machined metal with no inherent morality. The one that holds the firearm is the one with inherent morality, or lack thereof. The Smith and Wesson that is used to rob my family may be the exact model of the one that will be in my hand to defend my family; it is how the tool is employed that is important.

You say a little bit of tacit homophobia goes a long way. That statement is driven by agenda, I'd say, as it is implying that those who realize that homosexuality is wrong are also homophobic. That is a ploy used by the left to demonize those who disagree with them.
I fully understand that homosexuality is wrong, is bad for the individual as well as society. However, I also know that the homosexual is also a human, just like me, and is subject to the "human condition" of sinfulness, just like everyone else. My argument to those who forget the difference between the sin and the sinner is to ask them if they want the same for the friend who is cheating on his wife as he might demand for the homosexual? Both are equally wrong, neither have a higher weight of abomination attached to it.
The difference is that one group wants to accepted as being a homosexual, not as a human. They want to be protected and recognized as normal. Therein lies the problem.

Your response to the minority/numbers statement said very little, but I'll respond a little.
It is better for all concerned, both the present-day minority as well as his descendants, to work hard, provide for his family and assimilate into the society his has chosen to join. This isn't golf, handicaps do not belong.

Again, you miss the point. Those who see racism in the shadow of every white male in this country seem to overlook the blatant racism promoted by their positions. See the above statement for my response to how to solve the problem.

He,is not talking about being intolerant of those who look different or might speak with a different dialect, and neither am I. Both are referring to those who feel they have no need in assimilating into the community and abiding by the norms and rules that have kept the community civil. Wearing pants down around the kness and blaring a bass in a car that can crack window panes and aquariums, for example, is not an alternative lifestyle that requires tolerance. Those who have no other desire than to destroy society and make it an anything-goes orgy of garbage throw the tolerance around as if anyone who knows the difference between decency and a degradation of society is an intolerant troll. Normal logic and critical thinking should indicate otherwise.

Of course black people are a part of our society, that is not something that is to be liked or disliked. As far as the statistic of 70%, I cannot declare accuracy or error, but I can tell you that in my state approximately 67% of the state inmates are black. After working on both the L.E. as well as corrections side of the C.J. field, I can also assure you there is no grand conspiracy to lock up minorities. You can find the solution to this problem a few statements above, as well.

Whether or not his wife found out, there is still a problem. It shows that he doesn't respect oaths and he is willing to lie for his own benefit. That goes a little deeper than the mere sex act.

Whether or not one learns another language has nothing to do with buying a pack of smokes and the cashier speaking in the language of the country. Once again, assimilation is nothing new, has been expected throughout history and is the right thing to do.
When I was in Germany, a friend's wife (she was German) would not speak to me in English. She said I was in Germany therefore I should speak German. While I disagreed as we were on an American base and I wasn't there for any other reason but becasue the Armey sent me there, I agreed with the principle. When they were stationed in the U.S. she would not speak in German as she said that would be equally wrong. So much for practicing my German (I've long lost it, now). Sensible girl.

Now you are grasping at straws and jumping to baseless conclusions. There is nowhere in the "anthem" that indicates the guy disrespected the country of others'. The fact that you ask why someone should not come to this country to disrespect it tells me that I am discussing something with one who suffers from dementia or one who was speaking in jest. I'll assume the second.

I agree with you on this point. A cop does not have the right to shoot someone who is running, except under cerain strict conditions. I do not advocate a gestapo state and that sounds like the beginning of one. Remember my reference to Buchanan? Here is this guy's "Letter "M" stricken from the alphabet" statement!

The guy who builds them will have inspectors insuring the machines are built right, and after that it is a matter of logic circuitry. Still, I do prefer ballots over computers. I just wish people weren't growing so dumb they can't figure out how to vote! Yes, that was a double entendre statement and I mean both ways!

Your comment on the loans to foreigners says nothing, so I'll say nothing as well.

Same goes with the next point.

Your next statement, saying that because he doesn't pity the poor (in a nation where they can achieve more if they will try) nor does he hate the rich (Why would one hate another just because they achieved more in life?) means that he doesn't care about anyone but himself makes no sense, and again, you are jumping to conclusions and trying to build bias by creating illusion. Do you work for the Democratic Campaign Committee?

Again, you made no point, only attacked the guy by saying he just now recognized wrestling is fake. I recognize fakeness and simple attacks against a person replacing sensible discussion when I see it!

Same with the Hell's Angel thing. You were doing well at first, now you just want to trade "Yo Mamma" insults. What a waste.

What's your Bill Gates point? The author's point is that Bill earned his money by providing a good or service to the people and the people bought it. The author "defended" Bill Gates not so much s the free enterprise system and the right of people to keep what they earn.

No, Leveller, I have no intention of allowing such a divided "village" have a part in rearing my children. The "village" no longer meets requirement to be called a society anymore, as we have allowed those who hate American culture and values to destroy it from within. Again, you respond to a statement merely to add filler. Why would someone want their child to be reared by a village member that has severely conflicting ethics and morals? Why would you want your child to be around someone who doesn't understand the difference between being raised and being reared?

No, tattoos and piercings are not better political statements than this writing. You see, this guy is saying something that needn't be deciphered and figured out. The bellybutton piercing says nothing, and it certainly says nothing individualistic on the 10 millionth person to be seen with it.

You've never met an American who refuses to use the stupid _______-American crap? Well, now you have; me. Look around and meet more of us, you'll find there are many of us that are Americans, plain and simple. If we visit your country, we may feel the silly need in telling you that we have some ancestral connection with you, but that is merely to connect with you and share a commonality while we visit. Don't read too much into that.

Seems it was well thought out, you just don't agree with it, Leveller. The main point of the whole, long post is rugged individuality and standing on one's feet. IU don't think it is a bad idea.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

Your first point is well-taken, that is not enough information to base one's voting. It is more information most people use, nowadays, though.

Information is information. Not all of it is good information though. Some of it can set you back.

Your second point, that all of us would like to have luxury items, misses the point, at least how I view it and I think the author views it as well. There are some who would begrudge us of such items as they think it is wasteful and while some are not suceeding, it is unfair that those who have busted their butts to achieve their wants as well as their needs should acquire them. There is where the problem enters the arena.

The problem here is that you are creating a situation where "those who have not" will try and take it from you. I'm not saying give up your luxuries. I'm saying level the playing field.

Whether or not someone gives to charity is up to them, Leveller. People have the choice to give and what charity to donate. It is nobody else's right to take my money and give it to someone else. That is called stealing. I'm tired of groups, trying to take my money to operate their agendas. I give and I give plenty to those I feel is right. I assume you do the same. As far as those who misstep and find themselves on hard times, I hope they have a network of friends, church and family to help them back on their feet.

Charity should be nothing more than helping your fellow man. Is that not the morally right thing to do? You don't have to give everything away. But whatever you give helps another human being out of the dirt.
If you're worried about who you are giving to - Find a good one. There are plenty of decent charities out there.

There is nothing wrong with the first line of the gun argument which states guns don't make you a killer. It is, after all, simply a hunk of machined metal with no inherent morality. The one that holds the firearm is the one with inherent morality, or lack thereof. The Smith and Wesson that is used to rob my family may be the exact model of the one that will be in my hand to defend my family; it is how the tool is employed that is important.

I'm not going to argue with you here. The gun subject is a complex one. My argument had to be formed and put that way quickly. There was a lot to write about there in 20 minutes!!! I see it as logical but in no way complete.

You say a little bit of tacit homophobia goes a long way. That statement is driven by agenda, I'd say, as it is implying that those who realize that homosexuality is wrong are also homophobic. That is a ploy used by the left to demonize those who disagree with them.
I fully understand that homosexuality is wrong, is bad for the individual as well as society. However, I also know that the homosexual is also a human, just like me, and is subject to the "human condition" of sinfulness, just like everyone else. My argument to those who forget the difference between the sin and the sinner is to ask them if they want the same for the friend who is cheating on his wife as he might demand for the homosexual? Both are equally wrong, neither have a higher weight of abomination attached to it.
The difference is that one group wants to accepted as being a homosexual, not as a human. They want to be protected and recognized as normal. Therein lies the problem.

My views aren't much different than yours. I don't agree with homosexuality. But why use it as a political point? You are only dragging yourself down to the same level as those who do the same in the pro homosexual camp.

Your response to the minority/numbers statement said very little, but I'll respond a little.
It is better for all concerned, both the present-day minority as well as his descendants, to work hard, provide for his family and assimilate into the society his has chosen to join. This isn't golf, handicaps do not belong.

The problem is that you are rapidly becoming the minority. Maybe not in the US. But in the World. If you are going to survive you have to adapt.

Again, you miss the point. Those who see racism in the shadow of every white male in this country seem to overlook the blatant racism promoted by their positions. See the above statement for my response to how to solve the problem.

The problem is that there is racism. The white man has the habit of ignoring it though. The black man isn't much better - he has problems too.
You don't believe me?
Would you let your daughter marry a black man?

He,is not talking about being intolerant of those who look different or might speak with a different dialect, and neither am I. Both are referring to those who feel they have no need in assimilating into the community and abiding by the norms and rules that have kept the community civil. Wearing pants down around the kness and blaring a bass in a car that can crack window panes and aquariums, for example, is not an alternative lifestyle that requires tolerance. Those who have no other desire than to destroy society and make it an anything-goes orgy of garbage throw the tolerance around as if anyone who knows the difference between decency and a degradation of society is an intolerant troll. Normal logic and critical thinking should indicate otherwise.

Tolerate them dude!!!! If you're smart enough you WILL assimilate them!!! When they see how cool you are, they will want to be like you!!!

Of course black people are a part of our society, that is not something that is to be liked or disliked. As far as the statistic of 70%, I cannot declare accuracy or error, but I can tell you that in my state approximately 67% of the state inmates are black. After working on both the L.E. as well as corrections side of the C.J. field, I can also assure you there is no grand conspiracy to lock up minorities. You can find the solution to this problem a few statements above, as well.

I don't dispute the statistics. The whole point is why your statistics are there. You blame the reasons above - yet you're creating those reasons!!! COMMUNICATE!!!

Whether or not his wife found out, there is still a problem. It shows that he doesn't respect oaths and he is willing to lie for his own benefit. That goes a little deeper than the mere sex act.

Gotta admit, I was reaching here. But there is logic there. Sometimes a man fails - he's just being a man. Should he always be punished? Wouldn't it be better to educate him?

Whether or not one learns another language has nothing to do with buying a pack of smokes and the cashier speaking in the language of the country. Once again, assimilation is nothing new, has been expected throughout history and is the right thing to do.

I agree. But you aren't going to assimilate by ignoring them. You have to persuade them.

When I was in Germany, a friend's wife (she was German) would not speak to me in English. She said I was in Germany therefore I should speak German. While I disagreed as we were on an American base and I wasn't there for any other reason but becasue the Armey sent me there, I agreed with the principle. When they were stationed in the U.S. she would not speak in German as she said that would be equally wrong. So much for practicing my German (I've long lost it, now). Sensible girl.

Speaking English is easy. We've been taught since birth. But why expect others to speak it when we have nothing nice to say to them?

Now you are grasping at straws and jumping to baseless conclusions. There is nowhere in the "anthem" that indicates the guy disrespected the country of others'. The fact that you ask why someone should not come to this country to disrespect it tells me that I am discussing something with one who suffers from dementia or one who was speaking in jest. I'll assume the second.

Look at the rest of the world dude. Look at how they look at you. I love America. It is a country that can change the world for the better if it's people see the light.
But believe me. There are those out there who see you as disrespectful. Invasion of Iraq anyone? But why stop there. Look at your foreign policy for the last 50 years. Dude, you need to build bridges. Not break them down!!!

The guy who builds them will have inspectors insuring the machines are built right, and after that it is a matter of logic circuitry. Still, I do prefer ballots over computers. I just wish people weren't growing so dumb they can't figure out how to vote! Yes, that was a double entendre statement and I mean both ways!

It was just another point of view dude. Some people would see machines as being suspicious - especially after your last election.

Your next statement, saying that because he doesn't pity the poor (in a nation where they can achieve more if they will try) nor does he hate the rich (Why would one hate another just because they achieved more in life?) means that he doesn't care about anyone but himself makes no sense, and again, you are jumping to conclusions and trying to build bias by creating illusion.

You say I'm trying to build bias? Yet here is a guy who looks like he is to any normal eye like he is biased.
Look at the statement again TC. He offers a positive statement to the rich and a negative statement to the poor. Pity and Hate.

Again, you made no point, only attacked the guy by saying he just now recognized wrestling is fake. I recognize fakeness and simple attacks against a person replacing sensible discussion when I see it!

In my honest opinion, he isn't seeing the fake. He is damaging your cause.

Same with the Hell's Angel thing. You were doing well at first, now you just want to trade "Yo Mamma" insults. What a waste.

Hey!!! Allow me some humour. I was getting tired of writing by this point!!!

What's your Bill Gates point? The author's point is that Bill earned his money by providing a good or service to the people and the people bought it. The author "defended" Bill Gates not so much s the free enterprise system and the right of people to keep what they earn.

My point is that he has tied in your cause with the richest man in the world. There are a helluva lot out there who have nothing. They will merely see you as a pawn of the rich - the people that they view as bringing them down.

No, Leveller, I have no intention of allowing such a divided "village" have a part in rearing my children. The "village" no longer meets requirement to be called a society anymore, as we have allowed those who hate American culture and values to destroy it from within. Again, you respond to a statement merely to add filler. Why would someone want their child to be reared by a village member that has severely conflicting ethics and morals? Why would you want your child to be around someone who doesn't understand the difference between being raised and being reared?

Then unite the village dude!!!!
You can't keep your kid out of that village forever. You have to teach him what is right and wrong. BUT YOU CAN NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF WHAT'S OUT THERE.

No, tattoos and piercings are not better political statements than this writing. You see, this guy is saying something that needn't be deciphered and figured out. The bellybutton piercing says nothing, and it certainly says nothing individualistic on the 10 millionth person to be seen with it.

A mere matter of opinion dude.

You've never met an American who refuses to use the stupid _______-American crap? Well, now you have; me. Look around and meet more of us, you'll find there are many of us that are Americans, plain and simple. If we visit your country, we may feel the silly need in telling you that we have some ancestral connection with you, but that is merely to connect with you and share a commonality while we visit. Don't read too much into that.

Honestly. Hand on my heart. Every single White American I have ever talked to has given me the German Irish line. Dude, that ain't one or two. I love America. I've been to your country at least a dozen times. Then to cap that I had a close friend who worked for the USAF over here in the UK - I used to spend every Sunday on base watching the football.
Maybe you don't see it because you're American. But that is the point of my whole reply!!!

Seems it was well thought out, you just don't agree with it, Leveller. The main point of the whole, long post is rugged individuality and standing on one's feet. IU don't think it is a bad idea.

It seems exactly the opposite to me dude. That statement is nothing but raw emotion. You wanna get on with the rest of the World? You gotta try not to hurt their feelings!!!

TC. I don't wanna change your beliefs dude. The way you live is good for you and the way I live is good for me. But we're sending out the wrong message. We refuse to ever believe that others see us in a different light.
Well dude. Believe it. I live exactly the same way as you do. Yet even I can see it. And if I can see it so can those who fear us.

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

Your first point is well-taken, that is not enough information to base one's voting. It is more information most people use, nowadays, though.

Information is information. Not all of it is good information though. Some of it can set you back.

Your second point, that all of us would like to have luxury items, misses the point, at least how I view it and I think the author views it as well. There are some who would begrudge us of such items as they think it is wasteful and while some are not suceeding, it is unfair that those who have busted their butts to achieve their wants as well as their needs should acquire them. There is where the problem enters the arena.

The problem here is that you are creating a situation where "those who have not" will try and take it from you. I'm not saying give up your luxuries. I'm saying level the playing field.

Whether or not someone gives to charity is up to them, Leveller. People have the choice to give and what charity to donate. It is nobody else's right to take my money and give it to someone else. That is called stealing. I'm tired of groups, trying to take my money to operate their agendas. I give and I give plenty to those I feel is right. I assume you do the same. As far as those who misstep and find themselves on hard times, I hope they have a network of friends, church and family to help them back on their feet.

Charity should be nothing more than helping your fellow man. Is that not the morally right thing to do? You don't have to give everything away. But whatever you give helps another human being out of the dirt.
If you're worried about who you are giving to - Find a good one. There are plenty of decent charities out there.

There is nothing wrong with the first line of the gun argument which states guns don't make you a killer. It is, after all, simply a hunk of machined metal with no inherent morality. The one that holds the firearm is the one with inherent morality, or lack thereof. The Smith and Wesson that is used to rob my family may be the exact model of the one that will be in my hand to defend my family; it is how the tool is employed that is important.

I'm not going to argue with you here. The gun subject is a complex one. My argument had to be formed and put that way quickly. There was a lot to write about there in 20 minutes!!! I see it as logical but in no way complete.

You say a little bit of tacit homophobia goes a long way. That statement is driven by agenda, I'd say, as it is implying that those who realize that homosexuality is wrong are also homophobic. That is a ploy used by the left to demonize those who disagree with them.
I fully understand that homosexuality is wrong, is bad for the individual as well as society. However, I also know that the homosexual is also a human, just like me, and is subject to the "human condition" of sinfulness, just like everyone else. My argument to those who forget the difference between the sin and the sinner is to ask them if they want the same for the friend who is cheating on his wife as he might demand for the homosexual? Both are equally wrong, neither have a higher weight of abomination attached to it.
The difference is that one group wants to accepted as being a homosexual, not as a human. They want to be protected and recognized as normal. Therein lies the problem.

My views aren't much different than yours. I don't agree with homosexuality. But why use it as a political point? You are only dragging yourself down to the same level as those who do the same in the pro homosexual camp.

Your response to the minority/numbers statement said very little, but I'll respond a little.
It is better for all concerned, both the present-day minority as well as his descendants, to work hard, provide for his family and assimilate into the society his has chosen to join. This isn't golf, handicaps do not belong.

The problem is that you are rapidly becoming the minority. Maybe not in the US. But in the World. If you are going to survive you have to adapt.

Again, you miss the point. Those who see racism in the shadow of every white male in this country seem to overlook the blatant racism promoted by their positions. See the above statement for my response to how to solve the problem.

The problem is that there is racism. The white man has the habit of ignoring it though. The black man isn't much better - he has problems too.
You don't believe me?
Would you let your daughter marry a black man?

He,is not talking about being intolerant of those who look different or might speak with a different dialect, and neither am I. Both are referring to those who feel they have no need in assimilating into the community and abiding by the norms and rules that have kept the community civil. Wearing pants down around the kness and blaring a bass in a car that can crack window panes and aquariums, for example, is not an alternative lifestyle that requires tolerance. Those who have no other desire than to destroy society and make it an anything-goes orgy of garbage throw the tolerance around as if anyone who knows the difference between decency and a degradation of society is an intolerant troll. Normal logic and critical thinking should indicate otherwise.

Tolerate them dude!!!! If you're smart enough you WILL assimilate them!!! When they see how cool you are, they will want to be like you!!!

Of course black people are a part of our society, that is not something that is to be liked or disliked. As far as the statistic of 70%, I cannot declare accuracy or error, but I can tell you that in my state approximately 67% of the state inmates are black. After working on both the L.E. as well as corrections side of the C.J. field, I can also assure you there is no grand conspiracy to lock up minorities. You can find the solution to this problem a few statements above, as well.

I don't dispute the statistics. The whole point is why your statistics are there. You blame the reasons above - yet you're creating those reasons!!! COMMUNICATE!!!

Whether or not his wife found out, there is still a problem. It shows that he doesn't respect oaths and he is willing to lie for his own benefit. That goes a little deeper than the mere sex act.

Gotta admit, I was reaching here. But there is logic there. Sometimes a man fails - he's just being a man. Should he always be punished? Wouldn't it be better to educate him?

Whether or not one learns another language has nothing to do with buying a pack of smokes and the cashier speaking in the language of the country. Once again, assimilation is nothing new, has been expected throughout history and is the right thing to do.

I agree. But you aren't going to assimilate by ignoring them. You have to persuade them.

When I was in Germany, a friend's wife (she was German) would not speak to me in English. She said I was in Germany therefore I should speak German. While I disagreed as we were on an American base and I wasn't there for any other reason but becasue the Armey sent me there, I agreed with the principle. When they were stationed in the U.S. she would not speak in German as she said that would be equally wrong. So much for practicing my German (I've long lost it, now). Sensible girl.

Speaking English is easy. We've been taught since birth. But why expect others to speak it when we have nothing nice to say to them?

Now you are grasping at straws and jumping to baseless conclusions. There is nowhere in the "anthem" that indicates the guy disrespected the country of others'. The fact that you ask why someone should not come to this country to disrespect it tells me that I am discussing something with one who suffers from dementia or one who was speaking in jest. I'll assume the second.

Look at the rest of the world dude. Look at how they look at you. I love America. It is a country that can change the world for the better if it's people see the light.
But believe me. There are those out there who see you as disrespectful. Invasion of Iraq anyone? But why stop there. Look at your foreign policy for the last 50 years. Dude, you need to build bridges. Not break them down!!!

The guy who builds them will have inspectors insuring the machines are built right, and after that it is a matter of logic circuitry. Still, I do prefer ballots over computers. I just wish people weren't growing so dumb they can't figure out how to vote! Yes, that was a double entendre statement and I mean both ways!

It was just another point of view dude. Some people would see machines as being suspicious - especially after your last election.

Your next statement, saying that because he doesn't pity the poor (in a nation where they can achieve more if they will try) nor does he hate the rich (Why would one hate another just because they achieved more in life?) means that he doesn't care about anyone but himself makes no sense, and again, you are jumping to conclusions and trying to build bias by creating illusion.

You say I'm trying to build bias? Yet here is a guy who looks like he is to any normal eye like he is biased.
Look at the statement again TC. He offers a positive statement to the rich and a negative statement to the poor. Pity and Hate.

Again, you made no point, only attacked the guy by saying he just now recognized wrestling is fake. I recognize fakeness and simple attacks against a person replacing sensible discussion when I see it!

In my honest opinion, he isn't seeing the fake. He is damaging your cause.

Same with the Hell's Angel thing. You were doing well at first, now you just want to trade "Yo Mamma" insults. What a waste.

Hey!!! Allow me some humour. I was getting tired of writing by this point!!!

What's your Bill Gates point? The author's point is that Bill earned his money by providing a good or service to the people and the people bought it. The author "defended" Bill Gates not so much s the free enterprise system and the right of people to keep what they earn.

My point is that he has tied in your cause with the richest man in the world. There are a helluva lot out there who have nothing. They will merely see you as a pawn of the rich - the people that they view as bringing them down.

No, Leveller, I have no intention of allowing such a divided "village" have a part in rearing my children. The "village" no longer meets requirement to be called a society anymore, as we have allowed those who hate American culture and values to destroy it from within. Again, you respond to a statement merely to add filler. Why would someone want their child to be reared by a village member that has severely conflicting ethics and morals? Why would you want your child to be around someone who doesn't understand the difference between being raised and being reared?

Then unite the village dude!!!!
You can't keep your kid out of that village forever. You have to teach him what is right and wrong. BUT YOU CAN NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF WHAT'S OUT THERE.

No, tattoos and piercings are not better political statements than this writing. You see, this guy is saying something that needn't be deciphered and figured out. The bellybutton piercing says nothing, and it certainly says nothing individualistic on the 10 millionth person to be seen with it.

A mere matter of opinion dude.

You've never met an American who refuses to use the stupid _______-American crap? Well, now you have; me. Look around and meet more of us, you'll find there are many of us that are Americans, plain and simple. If we visit your country, we may feel the silly need in telling you that we have some ancestral connection with you, but that is merely to connect with you and share a commonality while we visit. Don't read too much into that.

Honestly. Hand on my heart. Every single White American I have ever talked to has given me the German Irish line. Dude, that ain't one or two. I love America. I've been to your country at least a dozen times. Then to cap that I had a close friend who worked for the USAF over here in the UK - I used to spend every Sunday on base watching the football.
Maybe you don't see it because you're American. But that is the point of my whole reply!!!

Seems it was well thought out, you just don't agree with it, Leveller. The main point of the whole, long post is rugged individuality and standing on one's feet. IU don't think it is a bad idea.

It seems exactly the opposite to me dude. That statement is nothing but raw emotion. You wanna get on with the rest of the World? You gotta try not to hurt their feelings!!!

TC. I don't wanna change your beliefs dude. The way you live is good for you and the way I live is good for me. But we're sending out the wrong message. We refuse to ever believe that others see us in a different light.
Well dude. Believe it. I live exactly the same way as you do. Yet even I can see it. And if I can see it so can those who fear us.

Good information is honest fact. Bad information is lies or twisted truth used as propaganda.

The "have-nots" that feel the need to take it from me might be unsucessful, and dead. The lack of motivation on their part does not make righteous their stealing or robbing, or does the threat of them doing so make it right to take from me through the government. The palying field is level, they have the chance to work and earn as I do. I'm not from a well-to-do family nor am I from a rich part of the country, yet I do ok, and strive to do better through acceptable means. No excuses.

As I stated, I do give, and as I stated, I give plenty. No offense, but I don't need anyone telling me to go and find a good charity. My family and I give so much that most of the nuisance calls are from donation-seekers that have been sold my number as an easy touch. I give according to my ability and choice. The point is, the government, and nobody else, for that matter, has the right to take from me in order to give to another.

I'm aware that there is individual racism, and I don't think that will ever go away. I also think that alot of it has been created in this country from the artificial influence on black assimilation, or the hindrance to that assimilation.
As to whether or not I'd allow my daughter (more appropriately, son) marry a black lady, the color has nothing to do with whether or not a person is right for my son. What she is makes the difference, not what color she is. You picked the wrong dude to argue personal biases considering a combined family reunion (my side and my wife's side) would look like some kind of U.N. summit meeting around a BBQ grill.

No, the gun issue isn't complex, that is merely a desire to call it that so as not to deal with the true issue. As far as the U.S. and the gun issue, it doesn't even have a thing to do with hunting, sporting or personal protection, it is societal protection against tyranny. The Founding Fathers didn't feel it to be complex and neither did generations of Americans. The "complexity" didn't come about until the social reengineers who wanted to disarm America said it was complex.

I see the policies of the last 50 years and see no reason to apologize to anyone. As a matter of fact, I see some past-due "thank-you"'s that are in order. No thanks needed, it was my privelege to spend my youth standing between Europe and Soviet expansionism while some of my friends were busy building their medical and law practices. You'd like them, they don't comprehend it, either. No thanks are necessary for Mr. Reagan, ignoring both the liberals and sometimes the conservatives and doing what was needed to win the Cold War. No, the past 50 years are nothing to apologize for, except in not being strong enough to keep the anti-Americans from doing as much damage to this country as they have.
As far as attacking Iraq is concerned, no apology or bridge-building needed there, either. Not that there aren't brideges that need building, but they are from Europe to here, not the other way around.
Interesting, the only time it is internationally acceptable (or acceptable by to the liberal democrats) for the U.S. military to be used is when there is no stke in the action for the U.S. and European nations are the ones who will benefit, especially France. Sorry, that isn't as it ought to be. If France, by the way, woke up and found the Arc de Triumph a pile of rubble, do you think they'd feel the need to ask our permission before they took action? No. As a matter of fact, they'd go to the U.N. and demand that it is our military that does the job for them. Save it, I know better.

Lev, the wealthy have created something, and the contribute something. Yes, yes, yes, that should be hailed as a good thing. I had every chance to be poor as a church mouse, and I had many opportunities to curl up, take the government cheese and blame my woes on everything and everyone else, but that isn't as a man should be. Poverty isn't a glorious thing and there's not much wonderful to be said about it. For those who climb out of it, they are to be lauded, for those who stay in it and wallow in self-pity, they don't need my pity as they are full of their own. Again, charity is given, but it is up to them to rise up out of it. Their aren't stations in this nation that one may not leave.

Metaphores, metaphores, how trippy they can be.
My son goes to public education, he lives in a town and isn't kept away from people. Unbelievably, we even allow him to interact with others. But, we are the ones who instill values, morals and ethics, and we make darned sure he knows the difference from right and wrong. He lives in the "village", but is taught how to be a man by me.

I think I can explain the rest of the discussion in a general short essay.
A nation is only as strong as its society and the society as strong as the glue that binds it and that glue is its common culture. That has been attacked for decades, now, for the same amount of decades as you mentioned that I should look back and see why we need to build bridges.
America has been under attack by an enemy called the Soviet Union. The enemy had the desire to conquer us, and it intended on doing that from within. We won the Cold War, but the mechanisms set in place decades ago are still eating away at this nation. In the end, neither superpower may claim to be a victor as we are no longer strong enough to stay the moral course and protect the foundation that made this nation a strong and beneficial nation.
You'd better pray to your diety of choice that my nation regains its moral compass, as when it spirals out of control, your fears of it being a threat to world peace and liberty may one day be realized.

Just the opinions of a wide awake and critical-thinking American.

Well don't you think you put the point across better than the guy at the beginning of the thread did?

Possibly, but the author was trying to be colorful and macho. What do they call that, literary license? I prefer to talk facts based on history, laws of nature and solid sociology when trying to discuss something as important as the topic. I guess the author thought that putting it in such a style would strike a macho, individualistic chord in some readers. Maybe his way was also to drive home an particular theme and such a style, he felt, would best serve that purpose.
I would say he was incorrect, considering how many people missed it.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Possibly, but the author was trying to be colorful and macho. What do they call that, literary license?

No dude. They call that stupid.
Are Republicans really that dumb that they need such propaganda? Can't they see what is going on around them?

Are you telling me that there is no better way to get your message across?

When you alienate other people with words, it's better to keep your mouth shut - especially if those other people outnumber you.

Who outnumbers who, Lev? I mean, really, the majority of America would look at each point and see a great deal of truth in it.

If you mean the rest of the world outnumbers us, that is beside the point. It isn't meant to be an attack against or kudoz toward the rest of the world. It is just the way things should be here.
As far are Republicans so stupid as to need such proaganda, that is to say, something written in such a fashion so as to pump them up, it isn't just Republicans, it is members of other camps (obviously not that many can be found in the Socialist party or the Green party ). But, as I said, I don't particularly prefer that style, I prefer to think people can digest facts without all the superfluous bullcrap. Anyway, I always figured too much machismo was an attempt to hide the fact that the guy is wearing women's underwear!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Who outnumbers who, Lev? I mean, really, the majority of America would look at each point and see a great deal of truth in it.

Dude. Who cares about American politics?
I live in the UK. I see what the world thinks of you.
You gotta change their opinion.
It's words like those at the start of this thread that forms World Opinion.

And when the rest of the World looks at you?
They don't look at you as Democrats or Republicans. Blacks or Whites.

They look at you as Americans.

You have to be careful enough when you're speaking to your own people. You gotta be even more careful if you know those words can be overheard.

Dude, Americans care about American politics. I assume. As the article, editorial, whatever you want to call it, was written by an American about America, dude, who really cares what you think of it. If you aren't from America, nor do you care about our politics (really, why would you? You have your own to play with), why bother to comment?

As far as we having to try and change you guys' opinion about us, you're more pompous than what you'd attribute us as being. No matter what we do, half of you will always complain. We could be all but the last drop of collective blood for the rest of the world and some will complain we held out on them. I'm not concerned about what you or the rest of the world thinks, we are doing the best we can and aren't causing havoc throughout the world so the heck with it.

Dude. Read the anthem. Again. Whether you like it or not. It was an internal memo, not to or about you.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Dude. Read the anthem. Again. Whether you like it or not. It was an internal memo, not to or about you.

*sigh* TC.
You still reckon you won your Independence and you weren't given it?
A handful of guerilla fighters against the biggest superpower in the World? And most of your guys from the Motherland?

Dude. We woulda had an easier time in Iraq today if we were half the power back then that you are today.
Doesn't logic say we could have kept the US easily? The British Empire had troops from all over the World to call upon. Troops that were hardened soldiers.
Guerilla tactics shooting easy target Redcoats my butt.

Ever thought your Independence was part of a conspiracy theory?



OK TC. Don't get your knickers in a twist. It's only another point of view.
But don't try the old "We beat you in the War of Independence" line on me.

Back to the topic.

My whole point is that you guys NEVER look at what is outside your boundaries. You look only to what your government will do for you.
You never look at the outside world and look in cool hard terms at what they think of you because you're too busy caring about yourselves.

I'm in no way anti American. I'm totally pro. But the way I see your people handling your internal affairs sometimes makes me think that the Rest of the World is given the wrong opinion. I'm not talking about the idiots like those who write the crap at the top of this thread. I'm talking about you the people.
It looks like you totally swallow it without thinking it through. That makes those of us that love you nervous, because we see those who don't like you, fear you more.

When you're as powerful as America is you should always keep your neighbours sweet.