This story is archived
OpEd: The American Way of Life »
Posted by: populist 2 years, 10 months agoOur "peaceful" presidents have taken, perhaps, over a million Iraqi lives & limbs, & thousands of the same for Americans. No amount of yellow ribbons will bring back a single one of them, or make a single loss worthwhile. This, we must recognize, is part of the American way. In particular, we must first recognize it if we are eve
Read Full Story at populistamerica.com »
Submitted By:
populist
The essays we offer are unapologetically presented for you to read & analyze. Many are offered as a similar view to ours & others simply to invite ...
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 340
-
populist
Feb. 15, 2007, 7:46 p.m.the point here is clear - if we don't like the actions of our government, we need to take away the tools they use to violate the constitution, invade nations, and "limit" our rights. to me, that's the overblown military machine.
-
BruiserTom
Feb. 15, 2007, 8:09 p.m.An excellent commentary.
I take the point to be that WE need to stand up and do the right thing. We need to stop lying down to corporate greed and stand up for ourselves, our fellow citizens, and our fellow human beings in other countries.
-
tanglang
Feb. 15, 2007, 9:26 p.m.Too bad all anyone gets from Bob Marley is stoned....
Which is probably what you are right now.
-
jordan11
Feb. 15, 2007, 8:48 p.m.I do understand the point of the article; however, the American way of life and its attributes still apply, objectively, to Americans. Unless and until it affects 'them' particularly, it doesn't exist that there is a problem, in their world view. I don't know that there is any way to impress on them that it's dangerous not to look at all of this from a broader perspective. Perhaps someone will find the tipping point to get through to them. I can only hope.
-
Amazing1
Feb. 15, 2007, 9:22 p.m.And I, for one, will not go down without a fight. I demonstrate. I have contacted all 535 members of Congress to let them know that they have sworn an oath to protect and defend our Constitution from all threat, both foreign and domestic. And our current administration is indeed a threat to that Constitution.
Our schools are dumbed down. We are being sold bread and circuses in the form of fast food and the ubiquitous X-Box. Our politicians keep their eye on their campaign coffers first and foremost. The good of the people be damned.
The article is spot on. I can only hope that the populace awakens and starts to demand better treatment before the violation of our rights is so egregious as to prevent anyone from doing anything.
Mr. Bush has negated habeas corpus and armed himself with the ability to declare martial law. We are indeed in deep do-do. What can I do to help?
-
STILLWATER07
Feb. 15, 2007, 9:41 p.m.They have declared war on the america people allowing the borders wide open ,allowing the way of 100 X1000's of middle blue class jobs leaving overseas never returning again!
-
NelsonR
Feb. 15, 2007, 9:45 p.m.The most important aspect that I most align with in this article is the explicted reference to our hegemony attitude among the worlds nations.
I know its a bad word but I tend to swing Isolationist. Not wholly since I feel we have made commitments to allies and friends. In Bush's world at least we do not have many friends remaining, so I do not see this as a major problem.
Some American's must equate our giving is an attempt to foster friends which is not working. We are not thought of as a benefit by most world leaders and their citizens. Buying allies with money and favors have been a detriment to the average American. Corporations benefit by world globalization but the downside is more service jobs and tech jobs being outsourced increasing the demise of the American middle class.
Our idiot representatives in their quest to appease the Decider only leads us farther down the path of no return.
-
Bukakke
Feb. 15, 2007, 9:58 p.m.I think that everyone that voted for either party and didn't get what they thought they were getting should take a look at this website.
Personaly, I have always wondered why the polotitions we vote for are not common people at all. How can someone that has millions and is more concerned about being re-elected even want to try to help the average joe? Now Al Frankin? Why do we have to have famous people or millionairs?
I keep voting for people I think will improve things But, it only seems to get worse and life more complicated.
Both sides seem to try to go after the middle class vote. I cant believe I am saying this. But, the only benefit I have seen is the family tax credit that Bush gave us. That actually made a difference.
-
agentX
Feb. 15, 2007, 10:08 p.m.Why in the world do we have troops in 150 nations yet we cannot secure our borders or have enough cops on American streets?
Surely the rest of the world is not so unstable that US forces withdrawing will result in massive bloodshed. Or at least that's what I think.
DOD being the largest landowner with THAT much land is for me a sense of obscenity. They should change their name to "Department of Domain".
-
mamasan
Feb. 15, 2007, 10:49 p.m." Perhaps the President is not far off when he says we are peaceful. Considering his difficulties with language, he may have meant docile."
-
NelsonR
Feb. 15, 2007, 11:30 p.m.Sorry about that comment about Chin2fat to all members except him. I do not normally do that since we are all human and make gramatical errors and he jumped me yesterday on grammer. Payback is a B@@@h.
-
EmperorJeffrey1
Feb. 15, 2007, 11:34 p.m.you completely misunderstand
the plan is not to turn america into a socialist state
that would mean isolationism in order to focus on domestic totalitarianism like sweden, norway, the netheralands, etc..
the plan is to build an empire...
take money from the citizens, dominate them only as much as is necessesary, but as no less than is necessary to keep them in line, and then flex your muscle around the world in order take what is needed to keep the ruling class...in this case corp. america..wealthy and powerful
the problem is that our leaders are clinging to our roots as a democratic republic for their propoganda, this is hindering their empire efforts, and everyone knows a job done half-assed is doomed
GOD SAVE THE EMPIRE
Vote for Jeffrey 1 2008
-
aceofspades1
Feb. 16, 2007, 12:27 a.m.chin2fat - I think the correct wording of the 14th amendment as to who is a citizen is as follows--
. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
There are no further qualifiers if you're born here you are a citizen period
Too many zealots whether left of right need to take some reading comprehension courses
BTW California didnt ratify it until 100 years after it was adopted - maybe they knew something about the current situation
-
aceofspades1
Feb. 16, 2007, 12:53 a.m.chin - so answer this - I am not talking about naturalized citizens but rather anyone BORN in the United States or areas such as Samoa or Peurto Rico - are you saying that if their parents have not taken an oath of alliegence to the US they are not citizens? sort of like being born with original sin? do they have to have a symbolic citizenship baptism?
-
aceofspades1
Feb. 16, 2007, 12:57 a.m.or to go a little further I am a second generation American. My parents were born here before their parents officially became citizens - does that mean my parents aren't full citizens in your sense of the 14th amendment?
-
Itachirumon
Feb. 16, 2007, 1:45 a.m.Hey Populist, I think you forgot the other part of the 6th amendment, its not just the right of Habeus Corpus, it's also the right to counsel, something else Shrub stripped from our country, I could be wrong though, it could be 7th or 8th, its been a few months since I looked last and I always forget, there've been so many stripped by Geor...I mean Lennie and Ch..Curley....
-
JohnQPublicComment has been removed: User banned.
-
JohnQPublicComment has been removed: User banned.
-
Nixon7
Feb. 16, 2007, 1:51 a.m.Our liberties are not guaranteed by Constitutions and Laws. They are guaranteed by our willingness to seek the difficult truth, to organize and inform ourselves, and to defend ourselves from tyranny.
I do not blame Clinton or Bush for eroding our liberties nor for selling our freedom and prosperity to the international ruling classes. I blame us for allowing them to, for being disorganized, misinformed, complicit in our own enslavement.
I blame us for thinking it is unpatriotic to rebel, to take up arms against the state, to aid those around the world who resist the corporate empire.
When we join together with our brothers and sisters in the streets of Oaxaca and Caracas, in the concentration camps we call US Reservations and inner city ghettos, in the mines of Appalachia and Southern Africa, to resist and reverse the genocide being perpetrated upon us in the name of God, country, and capitalism; only then will we deserve the fruits of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
-
johnb300m
Feb. 16, 2007, 2:11 a.m.Great Opinion article. I agree with it.
THIS is why everyone in the world hates us. We stick our militant noses in everyones business. Yes we are a great, self made, powerful nation. But who says we have to rub that in everyone's faces?
Why can we not be super powerful and humble at the same time?
I wonder what our government would say if France or Chile said they wanted to station a dozen or so troops in the U.S.
Any bets that would never fly?
But for some reson we can just post troops and military bases everywhere we choose.
I'm all for keeping us secure, and having some strategic international bases is critical to our security....but it just seems we've gotten too carried away.
I think if we really concentrated hard on our own domestic security, we could evacuate the Middle East, keep ourselves safe...and just let the Middle East implode...... there's the whole oil issue.
It's always about the oil.
As it gets scarce....things will get ugly. Very ugly.
-
youpeopledrivemenuts
Feb. 16, 2007, 5:56 a.m.What I don't understand is, if the gov is taking away all these rights,suspending habeus corpus,spying/wire tapping us all. Why haven't they rounded all you anti gov types up and disappeared you all? Incompetence
-
scriblerus1
Feb. 16, 2007, 11:06 a.m.Populist: You hit it out of the park with this superb selection.
But Rothenberg is not nearly strong enough in this statement: "We [U.S.A.] behold the world not as a habitat suited for peaceful coexistence but as a bad neighborhood in need of control."
We see it not only as a "bad neighborhood" that needs control, but since it is a "bad neighborhood," "we" (the industrialists who really run the country) see it as a great business opportunity. Why not take advantage? What's the problem with a million dead Iraqis more or less? And three thousand dead American soldiers?
(continued below)
-
scriblerus1
Feb. 16, 2007, 11:06 a.m.My previous comment continued:
Bush's family has been taking advantage of this great business opportunity (war) since World War I, when Bush's grandfather, Walker, headed up the War Industries Board. (See Keven's Phillips's American Dynasty, for example.)
It was ever thus, and meanwhile the mindless drones have always waved their flags and thumped their theocratic Bibles and believed all the pseudo-patriotic swill that the industrialists have paid the propagandists to ladel out to the boneheads who offer up their ungrammatic and misspelled nonsense in public forums such as this one.
Most of them have not enough wit to be even aware they have so little.
-
Skeptic
Feb. 16, 2007, 11:11 a.m.This is an opinion article and like all opinion articles, it is full of self-serving partial statements.
An example should do to illustrate. The author states, "Beyond that, we have active duty military personnel (some of it quite small) stationed in about 150 countries ... " He doesn't bother to mention that those military contingents are, for the most part, embassy staff. Or is he trying to imply that we are "occupying" Iceland, Norway, England, France or the majority of 146 other countries?
Some time ago, certain people would quote from a book whose premise was that bombing a foreign country did not guarantee peace. In particular, the claim was that we had bombed China. They don't mention that they lifted the statement word for word from the table of contents or that the bombing referred to was the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Bosnia in the late 1990's.
Some good points in the article, but the article itself is not credible.
-
winstonsmithredux
Feb. 16, 2007, 12:04 p.m.So, it seems Netscape will soon follow the sorry lead of Yahoo!, and, for the same reason, close off discussion.
There are, to be sure, many who can comment and debate, and whose comments and influence may have a beneficial effect on the overall course of the country's policies and directions, but they appear to be out-shouted by the same posters with the same juvenile mindsets who have destroyed many other discussion loci.
After seeing the repetituous nature of these efforts at distracton and misdirection, a reasonable person may be forgiven for wondering whether it is all a part of something directed at some national level.
Sad, eh?
The first 270 comments are shown. Show all 340 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
