One More Precinct Heard FromPosted by Dorothy on 9/13/03 at 02:22 (129818)
You know, I have tried, but I can't let this pass. Our country (that would be the U.S.A.) was founded, established, rooted in a breaking away from oppressive, decadent, exploitative, oligarchic Europe. We do not curtsey to monarchs. We do not bow to an 'intelligentsia class' and we have never saluted German fascists. Our country waged a glorious, unique, noble and brave Revolution to free ourselves from such nonsense. We - to quote that later president - 'brought forth a new nation'. We ARE different. We are special. It is not an 'inferiority complex' of Americans that you describe, but old-fashioned elitism versus American populism that is at work when people sense Europeons - and those who would like to have us believe that somehow Europeons know better - are kind of lifting their noses and sniffing a bit at America. And to use a fine American expression, it sticks in the craw! I have said before and will say again - I do not think we need to take instruction from ANY Europeon nation about anything. We do not need to be more like Europe. We need to be more like America! It is not some amoral, corrupt Europeon 'sophistication' that we need to emulate. It is our own (ailing) heart and soul and spirit that we need to find again! It seems to me that we are sort of lost right now, but we are very much worth finding again. And unlike every other nation on earth, we do have the genes of every Europeon nation, every Asian nation, every African nation, India, and all points of the compass and even in those few other countries where there is some slight diversity (France, Germany..), where do you see people who look different from the majority in positions of authority? How many Algerians hold elected office in France? Any non-caucasians in German positions of authority? I don't even recall that being true in England; is it? America is a fine place, David; it can be much better, but not because it suffers in comparison to any Europeon country; only because it suffers in comparison to its own best possible self!
Dr. Ed nor BGCPD (I think I have all his letters wrong – I am so sorry about that…) nor most others here have said anything so outrageous. They express the point of view of hawks and America has a long history of tension between hawks and doves. Both have their place and we need to hear their voices. I must also say that I have not found anything that Dr. Ed and other likeminded posters have said that is any more offensive or belittling than the views of anyone else on this social board. They are opinionated and I would describe them as 'hawkish' and single-minded supporters of the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Ashcroft roadmap to somewhere scarey.(IMHO) Why is that anymore intrinsically offensive than opposing views? These people don't need my defense, but I think there is an effort to suppress them because some others don't agree with them. I don't often agree with them, but I don't want to suppress them. I am not that sure that I have all the right answers as to want to silence others.
I am reluctant to tell Dr. Ed so, because he has said some nice things about my words that I appreciate, but I do not agree with his support of our current administration's actions. I think what this administration is doing/has done is harmful to our country, to our rights and freedoms, to our prosperity and to our future – and I do not think it will even accomplish what they claim they are trying to accomplish. I'm not even sure what they are trying to accomplish. There are intelligent people who think that this administration is cause for serious alarm. (George Soros, Paul Krugman - NYT, come to mind) And Rumsfeld seems like a composite of Robert MacNamara and Dr. Strangelove and that is scarey and Ashcroft - oh, my goodness - what can you say about Ashcroft. Some comedian said that he was the only person ever running for office to be defeated by a dead person - and that is true. Then he got his appointment.
I can't be labeled or pigeonholed, not here, nor anywhere else. I am extremely independent in my views and my voting. I rarely find a Republican or a Democrat who represents my views. I am proud to say that I never cast a vote for Richard Nixon or for Bill Clinton, finding them both despicable individuals, but I vote in every election and I am an informed voter. (Although I don't often pick a winner – Nader, before he became the Democrats' scapegoat for Gore's failings; Perot, before he was obviously um ..cracked…are a few examples) I was a supporter of Paul Wellstone (left and honest) and of Peter Fitzgerald (right and honest)- go figure! I am just always so very HOPEFUL for a new day dawning! I think I have made my views fairly clear here about the current administration and I have views about certain issues that are not compatible with Republican lines of thinking. However, I have to say that I do not think that Republicans represent Conservative philosophy, nor do I think that Democrats represent Liberal philosophy - and I certainly do not think the Clintons are Liberal nor do I think Bush and his club are Conservative. We used to be warned about the military-industrial complex; now we should be warned about the government-corporate complex and both parties dwell in that complex. I am worried about our country.
The dissention on this board is not about differing points of view; it seems to be personalized. There are times when I am tempted to tell someone what I think of them - then I remember that I don't know them; I only know what they say here. I think a lot of people here enjoy using the social board to express their views and even getting impassioned about them - that can be done in a cordial, civil manner. It seems to me that Wendyn posted an article that she knew would provoke some people here and intended that it would incense Dr. Ed and other 'hawkish' writers here; when he reacted, she retreated, while shooting a few barbs in the retreat. Smelling a little blood, David J. took up the cause and occasionally Mason comes down from his high post to push a button or two. Dr. Ed fires off another hawkish post and off to the races we go. Marie chimes in with an illustrative anecdote and tries to induce peace and John H. tries to describe a broader perspective. Max and Rick and Phil and Dr. Z and so many different and differing voices – it's really a lovely place, all People of the Feet in the Land of the Limb. So is all this just performance art – or – what exactly does anyone hope to accomplish? To be understood? To be heard? To be affirmed in his/her views? There is a kind of lovely community here with all kinds of different ways of seeing the world. It's good. It's lively. It is sometimes disagreeable. But we don't want to shoot or bomb or destroy each other. We use our voices and our minds and our words, imperfect spelling and all!
Maybe P.J. O'Rourke shouldn't have said 'Euro-weenies' and Dr. Ed and others (I think it was actually another poster who used the expression first) shouldn't have quoted him - but how is that very different from trying to denigrate and dismiss the current administration by calling them 'cowboys' as many Europeon speakers do? I read a nice essay recently about 'what is wrong with being called a cowboy anyway?..', citing all the qualities of a cowboy that make Americans love them – yet, suddenly ‘cowboy' it is an epithet. No, I think that in response to Europeons' calling Bush, et al, cowboys, all Americans should don chaps and cowboy hats and boots and bandannas – not in support of Bush, but in support of COWBOYS! All of this stuff is red herring (red herring, having nothing to do with Communism, not with 'pinko', nor with red-o..) and distracts from rational analysis of what is going on in the world and what we think should happen.
I happen to think one of the HUGE travesties was the fact that the Democrats did not conduct ANY legitimate, energetic debate about the Iraq invasion. There was NO domestic debate. Hillary voted FOR it. Lieberman voted FOR it. Kerry voted FOR it. Gephardt voted FOR it. That was the first astounding thing that happened in this whole debacle – no debate in Congress. So now they want to pretend that they did not endorse it?
Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich opposed the invasion of Iraq then and they oppose it now and they have never flinched about their views. In spite of being spoken of in dismissive terms, Dennis Kucinich is a man of principle and a brave man in that he has beliefs that are not up for the highest bid and he does not apologize for them. He opposes NAFTA, the WTO, and the invasion and occupation of Iraq; he is for universal single-payer health care. He will not be anointed by the press and both Dean and Kucinich will be vilified by Republicans and by Democrats, too. They will be mocked and derided. Why? Because they have good, innovative, smart ideas that are worth trying. I don't know anything about Clark, but supposedly the Clintons are for him (That worries me!)and he has NO political experience of any kind (but neither did General Eisenhower..)
We need to make America a strong place again – not just a tough place.
One final thought about the Palestinians need for a home: If there were any justice in the world, Germany would have to provide home and succor to the Palestinian people and at great cost to Germany's treasure. Likewise the former Soviet Union. Had those nations not treated Jews as they did, the question of Jewish settlement in Israel might have been a moot one. Yes, the fact is that the world does owe Israel and its Jewish citizens special protection and haven there. It should be the nations of Europe who provide it, but they have never done the right thing, so we do.
England fought in WWII in such a way to bring tears to your eyes even now, but they have a very bad record in 'Palestine.' The fact is that no nation, no country, no government is pure and holy. The other fact is that the U.S.A. is where people from all over the world try to get to and I don't reckon that's because they think it's a bad place.
I am stepping down now, and will be out of range of all shots.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromDavid J. on 9/13/03 at 07:00 (129826)
No shots from me, Dorothy. I thought your post was brilliant. Of all the messages in it the one that stands out loud and clear is that you want your country to be the best it can be. That's what I want too. I want it for both my countries: the country of my birth, and my adopted country. Like you, I am worried about both right now, and for much the same reasons.
Re: One More Precinct Heard Frommarie on 9/13/03 at 08:56 (129830)
You make some very good points. I think that we can differ in opinions now and then (mostly now) and understand that someone's personal views are just that. I have no criticism of anyone here including Wendy, Mason and David. We each bring a plate full of diversity to this board that continues to make it interesting.
Thanks for your views Dorothy.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromSharon W on 9/13/03 at 09:32 (129832)
I also thought your post was brilliant, Dorothy. A brilliant summary of your position, and I do agree with much of it.
But then again, I'm not surprised... you are a brilliant writer.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromEd Davis, DPM on 9/13/03 at 12:14 (129859)
That was a brilliant piece.
One has to do little more than look at a map of the Middle East to see that the Arabs have more than 99 percent of the land and the Israeli's just a tiny sliver. The money spent by the Arabs, not to mention the US and Europe over the last few decades in this conflict could have probably bought a nice duplex with a garage, car and satellite dish to every 'Palestinian' refugee on some piece of the massive amount of unused land owned by the Arabs. Unfortunately, there are those who have an interest in maintaining the conflict for a number of reasons. Most of the Arab countries are dictatorships with despots often needing to create an 'enemy of the people' in order to maintain power. The real tragedy is that the EU countries have pandered to those despots-- Arafat is given all the pomp and circumstance of a head of state when he visits most EU countries. Why is this the case? I certainly cannot provide the answers but feel that it is a combination of EU need for oil, cowardice to stand up for what is right (ie, the term Euro-weenies) and an element of long standing anti-semitism that has persisted in Europe for centuries.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromDorothy on 9/13/03 at 12:46 (129865)
Sharon W. ~ I have so often read your posts that educate, that share experiences, that guide us to new information, and that bring comfort - your words to me are very kind and I appreciate them, but au contraire - you are the brilliant writer. Thank you.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromDr. Z on 9/13/03 at 12:49 (129866)
I will tell you where I stand. The time for talking is over. The time for war has come. Israel must remove the ENTIRE terriorist operations in Gaza and the West Bank. Europe must pick up the bill to rebuild the place. Its that simple but simple has always worked. The Israel- Palestinian situation will only work when one Israel comcpletely removes All terriorist organization especially Arafat. The key is to have the European and Arab country pay for the rebuilding of a democratic society in the Gaza and West Bank.
Re: One More Precinct Heard FromEd Davis, DPM on 9/13/03 at 12:56 (129868)
I think that the Euros have protracted the conflict. Israel must be willing to act against the will of the EU. Britain's manner of partitioning the area started the mess over 80 years ago and they need to step up to the plate and be willing to be part of the solution.