America..tarnished, torn, yet still the shining beacon of hope

[voluptuary_manque]

I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I wasn't including us northerners in that, but we also didn't have a gigantic post about the history of Canada and how wonderful it is and why. We just said "Happy Canada Day" and that was about it...
If we had started it with a nice long post about our history with no reference to the Natives, I definitely would have commented on it, you better believe it.
Also, I figured I'd wait until after the actual fourth of July before I posted something that would probably upset people so I wouldn't disrupt their fun...

Peace, then.

http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii177/1volupturary_manque/peacepipe.jpg

 

[SpicyPepper]

Always.

 

[3113]

Actually, I'd like to take note of the title of this thread. It implies that the U.S. is like the banner in the Rocket's red glare there, tattered, torn, still flying. As if the U.S. was some sort of poor underdog, some battered soldier, fighting on. A tarnished light at the top of the Statue of Liberty that still shines its light of hope....

Can we get a little perspective here? The U.S. hasn't been the poor underdog since 1812. We've been, for nearly two hundred years a filthy rich, untorn, untarnished, ulta-industrial, top-technological, super-bomb owning, rockets-to-the-moon going superpower.

Let me explain what I'm saying here. I'm a writer. "Tattered and torn" are words of propaganda, they pretend to imply that the author acknowledges that the U.S.'s reputation isn't what it used to be, but it really implies that the U.S.'s reputation has taken an undeserved beating, and poor U.S. It's now tattered and tarnished, and yet still standing.

But the U.S. is no underdog--though that is our favorite myth. The lone gunslinger, fighting against all odds to succeed. It's not us, friends. It's really not. Think of our "Shock and Awe" tactic. Does that sound like the act of an underdog? Of a lone gunslinger?

The implication in this choice of words, "Tarnished and Tattered" is misleading, at best.

How about this title, if we're propagandizing: America: Brutal After School Bully....but there might still be some hope for it. What do you think?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Actually, I'd like to take note of the title of this thread. It implies that the U.S. is like the banner in the Rocket's red glare there, tattered, torn, still flying. As if the U.S. was some sort of poor underdog, some battered soldier, fighting on. A tarnished light at the top of the Statue of Liberty that still shines its light of hope....

Can we get a little perspective here? The U.S. hasn't been the poor underdog since 1812. We've been, for nearly two hundred years a filthy rich, untorn, untarnished, ulta-industrial, top-technological, super-bomb owning, rockets-to-the-moon going superpower.

Let me explain what I'm saying here. I'm a writer. "Tattered and torn" are words of propaganda, they pretend to imply that the author acknowledges that the U.S.'s reputation isn't what it used to be, but it really implies that the U.S.'s reputation has taken an undeserved beating, and poor U.S. It's now tattered and tarnished, and yet still standing.

But the U.S. is no underdog--though that is our favorite myth. The lone gunslinger, fighting against all odds to succeed. It's not us, friends. It's really not. Think of our "Shock and Awe" tactic. Does that sound like the act of an underdog? Of a lone gunslinger?

The implication in this choice of words, "Tarnished and Tattered" is misleading, at best.

How about this title, if we're propagandizing: America: Brutal After School Bully....but there might still be some hope for it. What do you think?

Brutal after school bullies don't send the Mercy to Myanmar, aren't the first "who yah gonna call" at every natural disaster worldwide, don't continue to pay for and give home to the UN no matter how annoying it becomes. Spending excess energy pounding our chests and whining "mea culpa" is just as much an exercise in egoism as flipping the finger to the EU when it didn't go along with invading Iraq (mostly because Saddam owed the French billions they were afraid they's lose). We are what we are. Big, powerful, sometimes ill-tempered, more often generous, introspective and self-righteous. Next question?

 

[cloudy]

Brutal after school bullies don't send the Mercy to Myanmar, aren't the first "who yah gonna call" at every natural disaster worldwide, don't continue to pay for and give home to the UN no matter how annoying it becomes. Spending excess energy pounding our chests and whining "mea culpa" is just as much an exercise in egoism as flipping the finger to the EU when it didn't go along with invading Iraq (mostly because Saddam owed the French billions they were afraid they's lose). We are what we are. Big, powerful, sometimes ill-tempered, more often generous, introspective and self-righteous. Next question?

You're confusing the actions of American individuals vs. the actions of our government.

Two completely different things.

Individually, we are a very giving people. Our government? Not so much.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

You're confusing the actions of American individuals vs. the actions of our government.

Two completely different things.

Individually, we are a very giving people. Our government? Not so much.

The Mercy is a Navy hospital ship and all those supplies we send all go out in Air Force Cargo Command planes. I know, lots of us don't think well of the current admininstation but the White House isn't the government. We the People . . .

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Actually, I'd like to take note of the title of this thread. It implies that the U.S. is like the banner in the Rocket's red glare there, tattered, torn, still flying. As if the U.S. was some sort of poor underdog, some battered soldier, fighting on. A tarnished light at the top of the Statue of Liberty that still shines its light of hope....

Can we get a little perspective here? The U.S. hasn't been the poor underdog since 1812. We've been, for nearly two hundred years a filthy rich, untorn, untarnished, ulta-industrial, top-technological, super-bomb owning, rockets-to-the-moon going superpower.

Let me explain what I'm saying here. I'm a writer. "Tattered and torn" are words of propaganda, they pretend to imply that the author acknowledges that the U.S.'s reputation isn't what it used to be, but it really implies that the U.S.'s reputation has taken an undeserved beating, and poor U.S. It's now tattered and tarnished, and yet still standing.

But the U.S. is no underdog--though that is our favorite myth. The lone gunslinger, fighting against all odds to succeed. It's not us, friends. It's really not. Think of our "Shock and Awe" tactic. Does that sound like the act of an underdog? Of a lone gunslinger?

The implication in this choice of words, "Tarnished and Tattered" is misleading, at best.

How about this title, if we're propagandizing: America: Brutal After School Bully....but there might still be some hope for it. What do you think?

Yes, let's get some perspective here. First, it doesn't say tattered and torn. It says tarnished and torn. This is a reference to a reputation, and it is an accurate one.

Second, we have not been a: filthy rich, untorn, untarnished, ulta-industrial, top-technological, super-bomb owning, rockets-to-the-moon going superpower for almost 200 years. I don't know how many of those things we are now, but we were none of them in 1812. Later in the 19th Century the US became a major economic power and it became a major military power about the time of WW1.

And, as the first post says, the US is still seen as a place to aspire to be, which is why so many people are trying to immigrate here, either legally or illegally.

 

[3113]

Big, powerful, sometimes ill-tempered, more often generous, introspective and self-righteous. Next question?

Hey, I said it was propaganda--my point was to demonstrate how the title slanted the argument and how upset someone would get if I put up a thread with that title pretending that it was neutral rather than slanted.

Take what stand you like, if you like, I expect people to have opinions and, on this topic, some very strong and emotional ones--but don't piss on my back and tell me it's rain. My objection is not to the position someone is taking in this discussion, but to trying to fool me into thinking they're being even-handed. The title, itself, says otherwise.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Hey, I said it was propaganda--my point was to demonstrate how the title slanted the argument and how upset someone would get if I put up a thread with that title pretending that it was neutral rather than slanted.

Take what stand you like, if you like, I expect people to have opinions and, on this topic, some very strong and emotional ones--but don't piss on my back and tell me it's rain. My objection is not to the position someone is taking in this discussion, but to trying to fool me into thinking they're being even-handed. The title, itself, says otherwise.

'm sorry. Wasn't meant to be nasty or self-righteous, just sort of resigned. I guess I need a better set of emoticons or something.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Hey, I said it was propaganda--my point was to demonstrate how the title slanted the argument and how upset someone would get if I put up a thread with that title pretending that it was neutral rather than slanted.

Take what stand you like, if you like, I expect people to have opinions and, on this topic, some very strong and emotional ones--but don't piss on my back and tell me it's rain. My objection is not to the position someone is taking in this discussion, but to trying to fool me into thinking they're being even-handed. The title, itself, says otherwise.

Titles of threads on this forum are often misleading, but this one was not. It sounded as if the poster was proud of this country, but recognized its imperfections. That would be my take on it. Personally, I think there were a lot of negatives in the 19th Century that were sluffed over, but I still agree with the thrust of the first post.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I am still proud of my country and will remain so.

In a few short months we will once again have a peaceful revolution here. Because of term limits, a wise application by later generations of an ideal espoused at the very beginning by General Washington, we will be done with Bush.

It remains possible McCain will be elected and continue some of his policies, although I do not believe so and will work against that happening. But even if we elect the Arizonan, Bush is gone. I find it difficult to believe John can match the incompetency and nepotism of George.

Our ideals, as written in the Declaration, are indeed still special. Let us not forget that Jefferson, Adams and Franklin stood upon others shoulders to write them, but let us also celebrate the fact that they pushed boundaries.

We still have greatness within us and ahead of us. I believe this.

The pessimism and despair of many is not necessarily unwarranted, but I remain confidant that it can be offset by the optimism of others.

I'm relieved that at least one person on the other side of the political spectrum has not become unbalanced and unhinged.

Despite what Stella wrote many here speak as if the world began when they were born - they have no sense of historical perspective and context, so every vagary of fate or policy they view as the "worst ever!" and conclude "it's over - we're all gonna die!" They haven't a clue.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Spending excess energy pounding our chests and whining "mea culpa" is just as much an exercise in egoism as flipping the finger to the EU when it didn't go along with invading Iraq (mostly because Saddam owed the French billions they were afraid they's lose) . . .

It's what I call the flip-side of neocon hubris: Instead of believing nothing can get better in the world unless the US takes a role, it's the belief that everything that's bad in world can be traced back to Uncle Sam.

(Introspect about it for a sec - don't just dismiss the notion with a casual "not everything . . ." )

 

[Guest]

I'm relieved that at least one person on the other side of the political spectrum has not become unbalanced and unhinged.

Despite what Stella wrote many here speak as if the world began when they were born - they have no sense of historical perspective and context, so every vagary of fate or policy they view as the "worst ever!" and conclude "it's over - we're all gonna die!" They haven't a clue.

Oh, now.

"At least one person?"

That's awfully rude, Rox.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I'm afraid not, Roxanne. The Corsican Republic came first. The Founders made many a nod to Corsica, and its founder, Pasquale Paoli. Once of history's unfortunately forgotten great people.

Roger that.

I don't know it's relationship with the actual history, but Rousseau wrote a "Constitutional Project for Corsica" that expressed many of the liberal, Enlightenment values enunciated in the Declaration (even though it's a bit of a muddle and is marred by his flawed understanding of human nature as being mutable.)

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Oh, now.

"At least one person?"

That's awfully rude, Rox.

Let me rephrase: At least some people on the other side of spectrum.

(I deplore rudeness and your point is well-taken, but you have to admit there's been an exceptional amount of feverish invective from that side in the past few years that really does suggest a shortage of historical perspective. Anyone remember the Alien & Sedition Acts? Anyone [besides Cloudy] remember Jackson's campaigns in Florida? I've already mentioned in this thread the original sin of slavery and that little dispute we call The Civil War.)

 

[MissVictoria]

We the people hasn't felt like we the people to me for a long time. Thats about all I have to say about that.

 

[Guest]

Let me rephrase: At least some people on the other side of spectrum.

(I deplore rudeness and your point is well-taken, but you have to admit there's been an exceptional amount of feverish invective from that side in the past few years that really does suggest a shortage of historical perspective. Anyone remember the Alien & Sedition Acts? Anyone [besides Cloudy] remember Jackson's campaigns in Florida? I've already mentioned in this thread the original sin of slavery and that little dispute we call The Civil War.)

And I'm not trying to jump in the middle of the fray.

I've purposefully stayed away from the patriotism threads.

I think true patriotism is more private, like religious faith, with the loud posturing often done by the ill-informed.

But that's just me.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

You're confusing the actions of American individuals vs. the actions of our government.

Two completely different things.

Individually, we are a very giving people. Our government? Not so much.

The European relief activities managed by Hoover in 1919? The Marshall Plan? I could cite many others, among them countless purely humanitarian relief efforts on a massive scale (how about an aircraft carrier using its nuclear reactor to make fresh water for typhoon victims). Careful that you don't let your disillusion color your memory or perspective - the people that operate the government are Americans too and have those same impulses, regardless of what you think of the public policy agendas of those at the top.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

And I'm not trying to jump in the middle of the fray.

Manners reminders are alway appropriate.

 

[cloudy]

Accusing me of not having any historical perspective is rather laughable, Rox.

 

[rgraham666]

You don't have the correct historical perspective.

 

[Stella_Omega]

You don't have the correct historical perspective.

The majority historical perspective.

Roxy's historical perspective.

 

[rgraham666]

It's all perspective, despite what the usual suspects claim.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Let me rephrase: At least some people on the other side of spectrum.

(I deplore rudeness and your point is well-taken, but you have to admit there's been an exceptional amount of feverish invective from that side in the past few years that really does suggest a shortage of historical perspective. Anyone remember the Alien & Sedition Acts? Anyone [besides Cloudy] remember Jackson's campaigns in Florida? I've already mentioned in this thread the original sin of slavery and that little dispute we call The Civil War.)
__________________

Accusing me of not having any historical perspective is rather laughable, Rox.

Actually, she made no such accusation, and even excepted you from those she said are lacking in historical perspective.

I'm old, but not old enough to actually remember those things that Rox mentions. The Alien and Sedition Acts were probably the strongest challenge ever to the Bill of Rights, partly because the nation was young then. The laws were passed during the John Adams administration, and led to the destruction of his party after we lost in a bid for reelection. Jefferson, the new pres. pardoned all those convicted, and SCOTUS later found the laws to be unconstitutional.

Jackson's campaigns were more against the Spanish garrisons in Florida than against the Seminoles, but he was ready for trouble with either group. As a result of his campaigns, FL became a part of the US. This was one of the earliest acts of US imperialistic aggression that later became known as "Manifest Destiny."