JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum America's Watershed Election.

I agree, Mike. Agree that we spent like a runaway teen with Dad's credit card. Agree that people who earn their wealth deserve their wealth. Agree that this will be a huge turnout, even among the many Republicans who are currently threatening to stay home rather than vote for that demon McCain. Agree that we can turn it all around.

I guess things always have to change.
It is time for change.
We need to stop sticking our noses into other countries affairs.
We have appointed ourselves the watchdogs of the world. Didn't Rome do that? and Alexander?

I am wondering how long it will take before Mexico becomes number 51. They might as well. 1 out of 10 is here now legally and another 1 out of 10 is here illegally and they only have 110 Million population. (Actually the true estimate is more like 1 out of 5 is here illegally, about 20 million, and they have about 1 million babies a year. do the math.
The State of Tennessee had 750 Mexican Children born in 1990. They had 8,000 born in 2006. that's more than a one thousand percent increase.
8,000 and that's just Tennessee.

And our friends Clinton and Obama say they will NOT build the fence and both want to INCREASE the number of Mexican immigrants into this country. They want to ease the restrictions and lower the fees for immigration. So more of these desirable workers can come into our country. They believe it is our responsibility to take care of these poor unfortunate folks, give them jobs so they can live the American dream.
Isn't that wonderful?

I don't have a strong opinion on immigration. But I will share my experience in running restaurants for the last couple decades.

I've never hired anyone who didn't have proper work documentation. That said, when I hire a busser or a dishwasher, the two least-agreeable jobs in a restaurant, guess who is interested? Immigrants. Guess who is NOT interested? Everyone else. Seems that every white-skinned citizen I've ever hired for these positions was either a drunk or a burn-out, or a high school kid who quickly loses interest and quits---sad but true. The workers from Ecuador or Mexico show up on time, support families, don't blow their checks on booze and dope.

I pay the same rate and I hire the best eligible person for the job...but I find it sad that so many young men and women who were born in this country have absolutely no interest in entry-level work. They don't even bother to apply.

Not making a big point here, just demonstrating a curious reality that every restaurant operator is well-aware of...

I have no problem at all with anyone of any nationality who wants to legally immigrate to my country.

I do have a problem, however, with illegal employers. Folks who will hire people illegally so they can pay them wages lower than market value. They lure people to risk life and limb crossing our border, and entice them to enter and work here illegally. Those employers should be dealt with harshly. They are creating a large problem here. They are depressing our economy by unfairly lowering wages (could I compete in any market if I didn't pay taxes, have to buy insurance, have to pass certifications? You bet I could. Heck, I could even compete better in the dog-eat-dog music world if I didn't have to pay taxes.) They are endangering the security of our country (by creating a climate that causes porous borders, at a time when there are folks around the world who dream of hurting us.) And, they are weakening our social systems (by enticing cheap labor, and not providing for health care as was done by employers for many decades, we now have a sizeable group of non-taxpaying folk who are using our social systems.)

I say go after the illegals...the illegal employers. The good folk who came here with the promise of tax free money to better their families will be only too happy to return to their homelands when they find the illegal employers are out of business. Any bad folk who slipped in, that's what you get when you do business unfairly, it's the illegal employers' responsiblity for them being here.

What Would Jesus Do
(C) 2006 words and music by
Mike Dunbar

I got the letter from Jesus
The time for the crossing is soon
We must bring enough water to last three days
Cross the river come dark of the moon
But news travels quicker than letters
Jesus died day before last
Still he wants me to bring 'cross the family
That was the last thing he asked

Chorus
The gringos now call us illegals
But they break the law same as we
I've paid off the Federales
Illegals will soon hire me
Breaking the law can deport us
But the little ones need to have food
Our brother, he gave his life for us
So I ask you, what would Jesus do

Our brother Jesus took the first risk
To see how the crossing was done
He was to send us back money
To help us join him one by one
Then lastly Mama and the babies
Would meet us in San Jose
But Jesus is now with the angels
And my turn is one day away

Chorus

Tag
So I ask you what would Jesus do

My 2 cents worth,

Everyone hollers about how much it would cost us if we lost all of the illegal immigrant workers, who would fill those jobs etc. If we added up all the money we pay out in health care, welfare, food stamps, law enforcement, prisons, , education,signs in Spanish, and all the other little add ons; we could afford to pay anyone who would take those jobs about three times what is being offered to do them now. The only people who really profit from these workers, are businesses who hire them under the table. Not only do they get away with paying them less than minimum wage, in most cases; they don't have to match their social security payments, unemployment, or health care costs. We get to pay for all that. There are millions of people, a lot of them more educated, and just as willing to work, waiting in line for the privilage of being allowed to immigrate to this country. If someone was allowed, or just decided to cut into line in front of you, how would you like it? The president of Mexico, in a speech in a European country, bragged that they are taking over America without ever firing a shot. I'm a believer.

Once again Mike hits the nail on the head. And your point about Russia and Kosovo is eye opening. Now it makes sense and I hadn't made the connection until your comment.

Empires come and go througout human history. Even the biggest and baddest of them all always eventually fail. The US dominance will eventually fall back no matter who is running things because human history really does repeat itself as much as we all like to think we're intellectually above falling into the same exact traps our ancestors have. With the rapid speed of technology, empires come and go even faster as well. Even the biggest bully eventually grows old and dies and so does the biggest hero and supporter of the little guy. It's a life cycle.

We're fortunate right now in the US in particular, but also most of the Western World, that our way of life is on top right now economically and quality of life wise. And it will likely continue that way in the short term no matter who is at the helm. But it will come to an end, in this case out of sheer numbers, when some of the other rapidly expanding populations simply expand beyond their borders, not neccessarily though battle, but through immigration, legal and otherwise and also the export of their culture (in the current form, their religious beliefs more than their art or music) and none of that can be controlled. Like it or not, if your population grows at a 7 or 9 to 1 margin each generation and others are shrinking, you WILL in fairly short order, rule the world by default no matter how smart or powerful you are or aren't. It's simple numbers and biology. The Romans were powerful and advanced and still fell to the immigrant populations that took over by having way more kids and expanding while the fat and happy (literally and figuratively) Romans shrunk. Eventually a tipping point occured where people simply held on to their own less enlightened way of life in larger numbers than those who were more educated and successful could overcome. As we entered the dark ages, knowledge (like sanitary conditions) was lost and people died off and the masses literally lived in mud until it all started over again. We may well see a version of that in the next 100-200 years, maybe sooner, maybe a little longer. But for now, those of us alive in any Western culture should feel happy that we're living with the best conditions of any society that has come before. and we should accept that just as surely, our way of life will give way to a new revolution of the weaker but more numerous among us. In the meantime, we should try to make things are good as we can while we're here for as many as we can. And if we work hard we're more likely to live a better life, and that's not always true in every society. We're the lucky ones in this era. We should appreciate it more.

Brian

John,

Can you show us the actual numbers that we could pay 3 times the amount with the money saved? Also, can you link us to the speech you describe from the Mexican president? I'd like to read that info myself. Too often folks toss stuff like that around based on what every one else is saying and I'd be curious to know what was actually said and what the real numbers (if there are any) show.

Thanks,

Brian

I am curious to hear what folks have to say about this. What comes below is not my words, nor do I believe or disbelieve it because I simply don't know. It's extremely controversial rhetoric and I think it says a lot about where we're at right now.

I've gotten this sent to me via chain letters and forwards from all sorts of people. Some are Hillary Clinton supporters. Some are Republicans. Some are genuinely concerned about it if it's true. I am curious to know the following: Which is scarier? That this is true OR that it's false and people are using this rhetoric dishonestly. Both are frightening scenarious.

So again, I preface this highly inflammatory rhetoric for what it is, some stuff that's been sent to me by people interested in seeing Obama lose. It doesn't mean it's true or false, so I'd like to hear from those more familiar if it is or isn't, and I'd be interested to hear people support either side of the issue. Do we want this type of false accusation leveled against our candidates when we're looking for truth? Or, if it's true, is it cause for concern?

Here's the controversial text:
---------------------------------------------
Who is Barack Obama?

Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita, Kansas.

Obama's parents met at theUniversity ofHawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. Hi s father returned toKenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.?

When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate toIndonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school inJakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.

Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, 'He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school.'

Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical.

Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenyasoon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta .

Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States , Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran.

Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegiance nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.

Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.

The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!

Would you want this man leading
our country?......
------------------------------------------
Wow... let's hear your thoughts.

By the way, I've heard bit and pieces of this reported by both left and right wing media.. so it's not 100% out of the blue. But it may be very manipulated and innaccurate nonetheless.

Brian

No one talks about the congressional elections. The people can elect Micky Mouse as president but as long as we have an active congress and supreme court Micky can be relegated to a mere figure head. For example after the 94' "Republican revolution" Bill Clinton was rendered virtually powerless and his ideas were rejected by an overwhelming majority of congress. He vetoed the welfare reform bill three times before he was eventually backed into a corner to sign it. That bill was written by the congress and not him but he took credit for it. That's fine, I don't care who got the credit as long as it was passed. We have a constitution that insures checks and balances and the thought of one man being a supreme ruler that can bring about radical changes with no one to answer to is paranoid thinking. The term "Leader of the free world" is nothing more than words. Ben

Ha! I missed your lyric post Mike. Well done!

Ben, you make a valid point which often is ignored. Sadly, we get a new president every 8 years at least, but we rarely ever get a new congressman/woman. The rate of incumbent victory is higher in the US than it was in the Soviet Union. And that's a dirty little secret that both parties want you to ignore, so they throw all the light on the presidential race knowing either way, their power will remain in tact. In a way, you could say incumbency is worse than royalty being in charge. At least in the case of olds kings and queens, the people have 1 person to get rid of to change things. We're stuck with a lot of dead weight criminal element pretending to be long term Senators and Representatives. Term limits would solve that. We're supposed to be run by citizen politicians who go in and out of private work life rather than existing their whole lives in politics. But those in charge will never let us have that. And those with a long serving corrupt representative don't want to give up their sugar daddy/mama.

But in the longer term scheme of things.. this too shall pass.

Brian

For shame - spending precious thought on an internet chain letter without checking it out on Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/obama.asp

In short, the allegations in that email are greatly exaggerated or in many cases fabrications.

Pat,

I am glad you looked that up though it blew what I thought would be an interesting social experiment (and I wish there was a list that actually took the email point by point which I haven't found myself). I was curious to see if someone would jump on it based solely on the salacious factors taken as is.

I prefaced it with exactly what it is. It has taken some actual truths and twisted them a great deal. We've gotten to the point in this election process where people aren't satisfied in chosing specific issues to support someone on, nor are they content with pointing out the failings of other candidates. Now they've gone from smearing people with the true bad things about them to something much more damaging and ugly.

We could easily go in and find equally evil stuff said about all of the remaining candidates and I thought about doing that, but figured it would tip my hat to easily (which you've done for me anyway Pat). In this particular case with Obama, I found it even more egregious than the typical attacks on Hillary and McCain (like the unsubstantiated reports in the NY Times accusing him of an affair or the myriad of hatchet jobs attempted on Hillary) because it came from so many types of people.. liberal democrats and conservative republicans. Religious people of a different faith and people who aren't religious at all. Men and women. And even different races. Instead of pointing out true things about a candidate to support a particular candidate, or at least true stuff to avoid another over, folks have ratched it up a notch. And why is that?

If you have to make false stuff up about someone having bad points they don't have what is it you REALLY dislike about them? Are there actual reasons which you can't be honest about (like race or sex or religion)? Is it simple ignorance? Is is that there's simply nothing good to say about any of them or there's nothing bad to say that's honest? Makes you think doesn't it? It sure makes me think.

I think it's an important phenomena.. it's like people would rather defeat someone over the wrong reasons than to learn if there actually ARE reasons they should or shouldn't support them. Don't you find that fascinating?

So.. this didn't go on very long, I was hoping to get some discussion on it and see what people said. If someone had said "I could never vote for someone who had X in their background" wouldn't it have been interesting to say, hey, guess what, "X" isn't actually true.. so will you support them now?

But I am glad that you took the time to look into it and post a link to some facts about it Pat. You rose above the tempations even though it didn't lead to a long discussion.

Brian

No matter how controversial or imperfect the candidates are, citizens of our country have the right to vote. Many people in other places would give anything to have THAT right.

I agree that this election is perplexing! I have been visiting the candidates' web sites and getting more specific information
about their records, where they stand on various issues and past accomplishments. That helped me decide who to vote for in the primaries.
In fact, it made it crystal clear.

I urge everyone to vote - every vote counts!!!

But...I'll choose not to share who I vote for, as I don't want to have to defend my private decisions.

Emily

By the way, I invited all the people who forwarded me that text to come here and share their views on it. I also asked each if they'd checked it out for it's truthfulness. None have posted here or replied to my request. And they're not all raving lunatics. In most cases, they are well intentioned people thinking they've got a smoking gun of information about something. I have to say, if it HAD been true, I'd be a little concerned just as I would be concerned if most internet hoax emails were true. But I knew it couldn't all be true because if it was, it would be endlessly touted by all candidates running against Obama going all the way back to his Senate race. But here's the scariest thing.. a large number of people will read that and assume it's true.. they're the same people who read all the urban legends that go around and believe them... I generally do what Pat has done (go to Snopes or a similar site) and often there's plenty of info about the hoax there. But most folks don't do that.

Now I have concerns about Obama. I also have concerns about Hillary. I also have concerns about McCain. All three have something about them to consider long and hard. And I hope I can cut through all the bogus stuff to the truth and find the right one to vote for (or an independent candidate to support if a good one comes around). Are most people that dilligent? I hope so, but based on the number of scam letters I get every day from otherwise smart people.. and based on the vitriolic hatred of the "other" party I get from good people who are both republicans and democrats, I am not so sure that's the case.

I am not sure there is a solution. It used to be that the media was part of the solution, but now it's perhaps the biggest part of the misinformation problem. How did that happen?

Brian

Oh.. by the way Pat.. Snopes isn't always right either. Sometimes they get a little sloppy on vetting stuff out. I like it when they site specific sources (which they often do) rather than just saying X, Y or Z is true or false. Sadly, I am not sure there is a single source you can believe when it comes to political stuff. It seems impossible to find people without some agenda or preference or ax to grind.

Brian

Brian,

I agree that is is impossible to know what to believe...due to various agendas and lots of propoganda....seems that the media is so biased. If people educate themselves, it is easier to spot and to weigh opposing views. But so many people believe everything they hear on tv - and never develop the ability to analyze information effectively.

I am on all kinds of crazy political email lists right now...not sure how that happened. I am amazed at the complete lack of substance that is coming my way through the internet.

Emily

Emily,

It's the same lack of substance that comes via TV and Radio and Newspapers. It's been most interesting seeing two sides in the liberal press go at each other. We saw a tiny bit of it on the right, but it was never a true 2 horse race like the Dem side is. It makes me remember not to trust the inevitable upcoming attacks that the Dems will level on McCain once they pick someone. And don't worry my liberal friends, I don't believe the propaganda from the right either.

Brian

I agree with Ben. No president will ever have absolute power the way our government is set up. That said...John Mcain will be the next prez. Take it to the bank. {I'm NOT an avid supporter BTW}
If I turn out to be wrong, feel free to jump on me,but until then take my word for it. Just a hunch.

I think the challenge isn't going to be policy to policy for McCain or experience. His biggest challenge is the rock star status of Barak and the 3 to 1 turn out in the primary over the Republican turn out. It seems hard to think that McCain will incite the same level of turn out. But there's a long way to go and it will be interesting to see if the near frenzy support of Barak will increase, decrease or stay the same. That may be the factor that makes all the difference.

Brian

I find it interesting that our President is supposed to be controlled by checks and balances. That he cannot do anything without Congress and the Senate approving it.
Yet our current state of affairs in this country are blamed squarely on Bush's shoulders. NO one else is getting blamed.

As far as the immigration issue goes if it was up to me our borders would be closed 100 % until we solve our own domestic problems.
Mexican immigration job rates have steadily increased while our black population job rate has seen a steady decreased. Coincidence? I don't think so.

As far a Mexico's "PLAN" for immigration goes.
I don't know if this is true or not.


For the rest of the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States

There are some good point in favor of immigration in there.

There's no chance they'll hold the employers responsible. They'd be afraid that some of their biggest donors would get busted for it. There are very few giant corporations who aren't either employing illegals or contracting with outside companies who are.

I realized that if the numbers of 18 million illegal Mexicans is actually correct, that 20% of the Mexican population is now living in the US. It's strangely similar to what broke the back of the Roman empire. They mate a fateful decision to let German immigrants in and those immigrants refused to learn the language or obey the laws and that disintegration led to the final collapse of the entire Roman empire. This is really just history repeating itself and there isn't a politician in either party that will actually stop it. So get used to it. It's not going to stop.

Brian

Finally someone gets it.
Actually Brian probably knew it all along, just neglected to mention it.
We had better do something real soon or our decedents will be living in Amerexico.

Or the other possibility.. Once we are weak enough.....
anyone speak Chinese?

The US won't get invaded because the ocean is still to difficult to traverse easily enough. The Chinese population will first spill over into Russia and Kazakhstan...

As opposed to some, it's really not the number of immigrants that concerns me, it's simply that they are all from 1 specific culture and therefore they aren't likely to want to adapt to the American culture.. and the truth is if we all moved to Mexico, we'd likely still live like Americans... it's human nature and I don't blame them for it. If you're not forced to assimilate, you won't. None of us would either. But if you're plopped into the middle of another country without 18 million fellow Americans with you, you're going to learn French.. or Chinese.. or Swahili or whatever is being spoken.. and you'll follow their laws and do it their way if you want a pleasant and decent life. If we need 18 million workers, then let's let in an equal number from the 200+ countries around the world that allow their people to leave. There's tons of people today in Kosovo who would probably LOVE to come to the USA. Same with several countries in Africa. Let's help out those being slaughtered by letting them come to the US legally and quickly to replace those folks who are working here illegally. And those folks, from all those different countries, will continue our tradition of a melting pot, which, in the end, results in them being Americans... but sadly no one in DC has the balls to make it happen. And that's the trouble.

I saw a story on CNN last night about Mexicans who were recruited to become naturalized so they could vote in the November elections. And because so many were recruited they overan the system and the waiting period would take until after the election was over. And all these people were angry saying their vote wouldn't count. And I was thinking that it was proving it had nothing to do with them wanting to be Americans.. it just had to do with them wanting to elect people to let more of their family and friends stay illegally as they once had. That's pretty jaw dropping. Give me your tired and poor and hungry.. just spread it around the world... either that, or annex Mexico as the 51st state and we'll all move on with life.

Brian

Brian I have been saying this for years and people have laughed at me and called me a racist.

I do not dislike Mexicans. I have a few friends that are Mexican.
But this country is being taken over and people refuse to recognize it.
The debate in Texas should have been a wake up call but no one heard the alarm go off.

Ain't it the trooth? I'm not comfortable with ANY of the front runners.

I'm sorry I messed up your little social experiment, Brian. It was just a knee-jerk thing with me as I hate when people will cite crap rumors like that as though they were made of gold.

And I am not a McCain supporter but my BS detector went off loudly when I read the NYT piece about him. If you read it carefully it didn't really say much of anything but implied a lot.

Trouble is, many Americans don't read carefully or think critically anymore, and have given free rein to the BS artists to convince them of anything they wish.

That chain letter sucks Brian. It does sound like some fear mongering and trying to tie Obama into the radical elements of Islam.

And that is too bad, because there is nothing wrong with Islam.

While western civilization, after the sack of Rome (which BTW was caused as much by large migrations of people from beyond Rome's borders as the internal decay of WESTERN ROME ...don't forget EASTERN or the GRECO ROMAN Byzantine Empire, centered in Constantinople, now Istanbul, lasted into the 1400's) lived in the mud huts Brian mentioned, Islam flourished among the advanced civilations from Moorish Spain, across North Africa, though the middle east and on through Persia and touched China and India. Much classical knowledge was retained there, and much was created there in the sciences and medicine, philosophy etc, and diffused back into western civilization.

In my books it is an honest religion, built on sober reflection, insight and deep sprituality...and it is the politics and radicals that have given it a bad name. Much like the radical elements of Christianity have blackened its eyes.

And to the author and resenders of that email, shame, on you beyond tarnishing an honest and important religion.

The USA has a terrible reputation for ugly elections, with candidates and their election machinery lying blatantly about other candidates. Add to this the hanging chad election, low voter turnout, coziness of elected officials to interests, and a host of other problems.....

AND HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY ACT AS A MORAL COMPASS FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD?????

Don't get me wrong. I admire the US for all it has done and tries to do...but this type of activity is ammunition for those who'd say you have absolutely no right to impose democracy anywhere in the world.

Set a good example...THAT works.

John,

I always find it interesting when another country, especially one so very similar to the USA in nearly all ways, points to the USA as being responsible to set the standard and in truth, be held to a higher standard. Why is that John? In Poland, Canada is the gold standard for quality of life and glamour and importance.. did you know that? I didn't know that until I visited Auschwitz and found that not only in WWII but still to this day they consider Canada as setting the bar. I've never found that anywhere else though. (And more ironic is the fact that Poland is one of the USA's biggest international supporters...)

Everywhere else in Europe, whether it was former Soviet Eastern block nations or traditional democracy countries like France, the USA was definitely held responsible for all ills in the world. Not that they accused the USA of causing it (though occasionally they did) but rather they simply expected the USA to be responsible to fix it, as if we were the welfare state for the entire world. In Paris, I had a long discussion with a Moroccan born French citizen. He was a great guy, very smart and very informed on the world. He felt it was the USA who was to blame for African genocide because we didn't step in and stop it with military action. I explained to him we had no international support to do so and right now our lack of support going into Iraq is our biggest Achilles heel. He said it didn't matter.. they thought we should not have gone into Iraq.. but they expect us to go anywhere else where oppressive governments are killing their citizens and not letting them live free. Again, I reminded him that Saddam Hussein was killing his citizens and not allowing them to live free. Again, he said it didn't matter.. we were still wrong in that case and also wrong for not invading Somalia and other African nations committing genocide. So I asked him why the French didn't just go into Somalia and stop it. The French military could EASILY go in and take control in a short time. He said even though that is true, it's the responsibility of the USA to lead first and then ask for the help of France and others. And I found his attitude to be pretty consistent around Europe. They really DO expect the USA to be the world's police in nearly every matter EXCEPT the one we took in Iraq. And they hold us responsible for not stopping genocides even though they themselves choose not to stop it either.

Why is that?

Brian

Brian
The rest of the world blames us for everything from Head Lice to Tsunamis. And hates us for our way of life, don't want anything to do with us.

Until....they get infested with head lice or hit with a Tsunami.
Then we are their best friend....until we are done fixing it for them.

Thank you, Doug.

We all have opinions, and only an idiot would think his or her arguments will persuade those on the other side of the political coin to "see the light". The one thing you can be sure of is that no one knows what will happen. If they did, they'd be getting rich off lotteries. What we can know, though, is what is happening now.

I don't like what I see happening now. I'm not proud of my country. I'm embarrassed for it. It will be interesting, if four years from now Republicans aren't running the show, to compare the two states of the Union, present and future.
If one recalls the state of the Union under the former, Democratic administration, a comparitively blissful world emerges. Two people sharing a cigar, compared to channeling billions of dollars into military aggression is, well, need I even finish that sentence? I, for one, would like to see a return to sanity, and will vote accordingly.

In anticipation of arguments like, "I'd rather fight 'em over there than fight 'em over here", let me say to those of you who buy into that: the only reason you fear attack is that you, yourself, are willing to attack others. I am not. Many people in the countries we are warring in side with me, and many side with you. But if the majority side with me, the only thing you'll have to fear is your own side.

Yep Blissful it was.
We sat by blissfully while our enemies walked into this country and learned to fly airliners right under our noses after Clinton raided our military and intelligence community to balance his budget. Then a little over six months after Clinton was out they struck...and folks blame it on Bush.
Clinton signed Nafta into Law and we sat by and blissfully watched it destroy our economy. Even Obama admits that.

Ollie North, under Regan, warned Congress that Osama Bin Laden was the most dangerous man on the planet and Al Gore said that was Nonsense. He had never even heard of Bin Laden and wanted to put Ollie North in Jail.

Those are facts Check them yourself.
This war is bad, there is no doubt about that. We need to get out of it. But the war is the least of our problems. We are being destroyed from within.

Yep I guess ignorance is bliss.
It was Blissful.
Blissful ignorance.

Y'know, there is probably a song in all that. Should it be done in English?

Joe

Yeah Joe,
Write it in English. It's the only Language I know.
Conspiracy Theories. We have em. A lot of people still think Kennedy was killed by a government conspiracy.
I guess the latest is about Obama. The American people aren't fooled very often. Sorry don't see any conspiracy.
Hillary talked about a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. No, not exactly. Now Bill and Hillary conspiring. Not much doubt.

It is amazing that many foreigners think the United States has to baby sit the world. Aids in Africa. Bonehead, er ah Bono is right here waiting for the Eagle to fly over and fix the problem.
Ain't it nice that the American Taxpayer is so generous.

I forget exactly but it seems some time back we had pressure on us to forgive debt of some countrys that we had loaned millions or maybe billions to.

And no matter what we do we are slammed in the United Nations as well as by many of our own citizens.

Well if you don't like living here I will see if I can get enough donations for a one way ticket to a destination of your choice. At the moment I don't know too many people planning to leave.

What I would suggest to someone who is not proud to be an American is that they get on a plane to Pakistan and once there head north into the mountains. Hang a sign around your neck proclaiming you are an American but are ashamed to be and are on "their" side.
See what happens then send us a report.

The reason I think that Mcain will win is because I don't think Obama's "Cult of Personality" is gonna ring true with "Joe six-pack" who will ultimately decide this election.

Bill. Ray. I respect your right to interpret events as you wish.

Let's examine the Privacy Act that has been instituted since 9/11. Read it the next time you're at a doctor's office. It authorizes the exchange, between businesses, for business purposes, of any personal information you disclose. It's actually a "forfeiture of privacy" document.
After you read it, hand it back to the receptionist unsigned. Guess what. They won't treat you unless you sign it. Why? Ask. Then post it here. I dare you.

Why is it that the loudest voices claiming the right to free speech are most often those who fight against our right to defend it, or defend those who have had it taken away!

Brian, I guess it is because the US has taken on the role.

The McKinley Doctrine was isolationist, and it took WWI and WWII to tune the USA's attention fully to the rest of the world.

Once it did, it began to lead the world, and in many admirable cases, helped avoid or mitigate disasters, both natural and man made.

One crux of the problem lies that in doing so, it also tried to export it's way of life and thinking and instill the USA as "the beacon of democracy". So, at least from that perspective, it is the USA that has created the role for itself.

That the rest of the world agrees or disagrees is not the issue. From a marketer's perspective, it is simply how the US has "positioned" itself.

I guess another is that, if you give out free fish, and are known for doing so, recipients come to depend on it, and there are those who will ask "why did I not get any fish?", or "why is my neighbour's fish larger than mine?"

Political Science --- Randy Newman -- 1970? -- From my memory

Everyone hates us, I don't know why
we may not be perfect but heaven knows we try
The whole world round
even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the big one, and see what happens.

We give them money, but are they grateful?
No they're spiteful and they're hateful.
They don't expect it
so let's surprise 'em.
We'll drop the big one and pulverise 'em.

Asia's too crowded, and Europe's too old.
Africa's far too hot and Canada's too cold.
South America stole our name
let's drop the big one there'll be no one left to blame us.

We'll save Australia
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo.
Build an all American amusement park there
They got surfing too.

Boom goes London, and boom Paree
More room for you and more room for me.
And every city
the whole world round
will just be another American

Think how happy we will be
we'll set everybody free
There'll a Japanese kimona for you babe
and Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow.
So let's drop the big one now.
Let's drop the big one now.

I heard Bonnie Raitt do this on concert a coupla years ago and it was still enjoyable.

Midnite

Actually
I don't care.
I think it is ridiculous that a Person has the right to conceal that they have a contagious life threatening disease, like Aids. Or Tuberculosis.
And, I have nothing to hide. So they can share whatever they like.



So, question.
Do you sign it or do you have the courage of your conviction and refuse to sign it? Of course if you don't you won't be treated. Which means you might die. What do you do?

And there is no interpreting events here.
I was watching the Ollie North Hearings when that exchange went on between Senators and Ollie North. It never really happened as far as I know.
Clinton did sign the NAFTA agreement.
And he did cut the military and CIA and the other intelligence agencies severely.

Ray
You are correct
It was BILLIONS of dollars forgiven. I cannot remember which countries but South of the border rings a bell.

Uh, Well,
The USA may not be the best country to live in but it is way ahead of whoever is in second place.

And the most amazing thing is nobody planned it that way, it just happened. My ancesters on my fathers side and probably my mothers side too were here before the revolution. And believe it or not, I think it turned out pretty well in spite of setbacks here and there. And there are a long list of things I don't like but you know what, I think I'll just stay. The best is yet to come!

Stringfellow, my doctor barely has time to see all his patients, than to pass out much private information. If someone sends me an advertisement in the mail I have a place to put it. Case closed! Can you imagine all the time it takes to examine tons of private information.

Another thing I find interesting is how the Numbers are crunched. I do not understand how it works.

I do know that the USA spent about 280 BILLION per year during PEACE times to fund our Military Prior to the current Iraq war.
The Iraq war has added about 80 to 100 BILLION a year to that.

If the Troops were brought home tomorrow the 280 BILLION per year would still be there.

I think we are probably spending more money on Civilian matters in Iraq than we are on Military matters.
But it probably isn't more than we spend in other countries doing the same things.

But if Iraq is costing 100 Billion a year that's 700 Billion since it started so why is the debt 9 Trillion.

I would like a full explanation of how they determine the Debt.
Does anyone know?

This was written some 35 years ago, by an eminent Canadian broadcaster...bears repeating here..




Gordon Sinclair
1900-1984

This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there....I saw it!

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, war-mongering Americans.

I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplanes. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon?

You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times - and safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those....

John
Thanks for posting that. I have read it before and it always gives me a lump in my throat.

I think one REAL reason for the USA helping other countries is the simple fact that we are a nation of Immigrants.
Everyone in America except the American Indian is from another country. And even they came across the land bridge from Asia.

Most of us are proud of that. We call ourselves African/American, Irish/American, German/American, Mexican/American, ETC. And I think we can be proud of that.

It only stands to reason that we would want to reach out and help the countries of our ancestors.

I wonder when another country, Like France or Germany for instance, starts blasting the USA for our lifestyle or the things we do. Some of our decisions are made by French/Americans, or German/Americans.

My Ancestors came to this country in the Early 1600's from England, Ireland, and Scotland. I am proud of that. I am proud that I am an American but I always tell my Grand kids where our people came from. I don't want them to forget that.
If they know they came from the UK (and we now have European and Mexican blood in the family) and Europe then they will be more likely to reach out and help those countries when they need help.

And that's a good thing.

Hi John V.,

Thanks for posting this. It came out in a time that America was being doubted by it's own, and judged by most of the rest of the world. I remember this speech when it came out. It was played, in its entirety by radio and TV stations across America. We are in much the same boat now as we were then. It was great to see this speech again.

I see on CNN.com that Ralph Nader has decided to enter the race. Here's a quote from CNN:

"In an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press," the consumer advocate said great changes in U.S. history have come "through little parties that never won any national election.""

Yes, they have, Ralph - yes they have

The USA remains the sole superpower at this moment in time. Looking back on history, I don't remember a whole lot of "America Sucks" sentiment before WW2, other than from countries we were fighting at the time. But once we were on top, yes, we've been like the guest of honor at an international roast...everyone bitches and moans about winners and rich people. "Damned Americans have too much power and money and freedom." Well, fine. Let them complain. Better to take the high road and continue to behave in the way Gordon Sinclair so admired.

We are a nation of immigrants. Currently, many of us also consider the rising flood of immigrants to be enemies of the nation. And Brian has the excellent point, bolstered by historical examples, that unabated immigration problems often lead to the downfalls of such nations. The laws we pass and uphold will decide the immigration problem, probably much more than who is elected president. If you've ever played the game Risk, you grasp the futility of building a wall around the USA. Better to enforce the law and close the loopholes. This will be more the work of legislature than of a president...and we can play individual roles in that process in our home towns by actively involving ourselves in the civic process of politics.

Consider this as we worry about our side winning or losing the next presidential election: the best thing the USA has ever done for itself was to draft a very forward-thinking Constitution. The amendment process is very, very difficult to achieve...and that is a Good Thing. So, every time we have a political sea change, when a Carter replaces a Ford, when a Reagan replaces a Carter, when a Clinton replaces a Bush...that very different set of opinions is still beholden to the constitution.

That's our safety net. That's why I wouldn't freak out and move to another country like staunch members of one side always seem to declare they will do should the crazy other side win the next election...like little kids taking their ball away and refusing to play anymore... It's the constitution. It's the trunk of the tree that allows the branches to sway this way and that.

But beware of people who passionately wish to change that constitution, or to buck it out of fear and the need for self-protection. That's the cowardly beginning of an untimely end.

Dying not long after writing that spared him the sorrow of watching such an America disappear.