First of all, I consider myself a very open-minded person. I'm not a member of any party, and I'm able to see different sides of an issue, even if I don't agree with them.

But I was absolutely unable to stomach the Republican convention this year. The slogan - "America First"! The chanting "USA USA!" -- the implication that if you don't agree with us, you're not patriotic! Yes, I know it's nothing new and I should be more cynical -- but in this election, between two intelligent candidates with very different positions, I expected more focusing on issues, less of this divisive jingoistic idiocy. Pass the barf bag.

There is another country that whipped up a lot of public sentiment with the theme of "Us First" a.k.a. "über alles". Not so long ago either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutschlandlied

No comparisons otherwise, I am simply talking about rhetoric and its dangers.

JANICE

Interesting to note that just a short time ago Obama was standing in Berlin and in his historic speech said "People, look at Berlin". And rather ironic to see all those Germans waving the American flag. This stuff makes my head spin sometimes.

Does anyone remember who it was that said after 9/11/01
"We're all Americans now"?

And of course recently, McCain was saying: ]We're all Georgians Now. Everyone has been asking of late, where is Dick Cheney. I heard tell that he has been over in Georgia this week talking to that dude with the last name I can't pronounce.



[This message has been edited by Anne Bryant-Hamon (edited September 05, 2008).]

McCain may be Sarah's trojan horse to catapult herself and the "first dude" into the White House.

Well, one of the many shoes that dropped this week is that it is "Alaska First", not America First. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4687705.ece

Out of curiousity, I looked up the words to the Alaska State Song and found it sort of mysterious and interesting:

The Alaska State Song

Alaska's Flag
http://www.netstate.com/states/images/ak.gif
words by Marie Drake, music by Elinor Dusenbury

Eight stars of gold on a field of blue -
Alaska's flag. May it mean to you
The blue of the sea, the evening sky,
The mountain lakes, and the flow'rs nearby;
The gold of the early sourdough's dreams,
The precious gold of the hills and streams;
The brilliant stars in the northern sky,
The "Bear" - the "Dipper" - and, shining high,
The great North Star with its steady light,
Over land and sea a beacon bright.
Alaska's flag - to Alaskans dear,
The simple flag of a last frontier.

Second verse written by Carol Beery Davis

A Native lad chose the Dipper's stars
For Alaska's flag that there be no bars
Among our culture. Let it be known
Through years the Native's past has grown
To share life's treasures, hand in hand,
to keep Alaska our Great-Land;
We love the northern midnight sky,
the mountains, lakes and streams nearby.
The great North Star with its steady light
will guide all cultures, clear and bright,
with nature's flag to Alaskan's dear,
the simple flag of the last frontier.
__________________________________________________


http://www.netstate.com/states/images/ak.gif

Marion,

From what I understand, the chanting U.S.A - U.S.A. was to mask the demonstrations and outbursts of dissenting voices that had snuck into the convention, i.e. Code Pink, and Iraq Veterans against McCain. It happened during McCain's speech, as you might have noticed and he said to his supporters, "Please, please, please, my friends, ignore the static and ground noise" - meaning, ignore the protesters.

Are you aware of the arrests in Denver and the "free speech" zones that are far, far away from the meeting place?
There can be no dissent against the state - period. The books written about the trashing of the Constitution and our nation turning to a police state have been abundant for the past 6 years, books like The Shock Doctrine (The Rise of Disaster Capitalism) by Naomi Kline, or Armed MadHouse by Greg Palast, or Screwed by Thom Hartman, or F.U.B.A.R. (f'd up beyond recognition) by Sam Seder are just a handful out of many that come to mind. I think McCain will be installed with Sarah Palin (they're only figureheads anyway, right?). I'm still going to vote for Obama, but I certainly don't feel confident that he will be able to win. I've read too many books about the engineering of America's destruction to feel hopeful about our future as a nation.

If they really believed "America First!" I would have little problem with it, but they don't believe it. Their actions over the past 30 years show that they ABSOLUTELY will NOT put "America First." Neither "God First" nor even "Family First."

America has an exploding deficient. If they believed in "America First!" they would be begging for higher taxes, but they do not. Or at least, beg to leave the tax rates the same, but they do not. Or at least, beg to delay the tax cuts, but they do not. It's "Tax Cuts First, and who cares about America!" Of course, they don't say that because saying it would require a little thing called "honesty."

There is an out-moded concept called "the work ethic" that says if you want MORE money, you have to work MORE to get that money. They do, however, PREACH the "work ethic" to the handicapped so I, with a brain hemorrhage, did their bidding. But when they want more money, they don't work for it. That would be inconvenient. They get a tax cut, and if it's not enough, they just get a bigger tax cut. The reason for the difference is obvious: the handicapped are mere mortals, while they, the elite, are gods.

Similarly with their "abstinence" command. I, being a mere mortal, obeyed their commands and was abstinent over 50 years. They, being the elite, of course do not have to practice what they preach. After all, they are gods and, as such, are not limited like the rest of us.

But to get back to the "order of things," it seems to be this:

"Money First!" (then)
"Pleasure Second!" (and maybe)
"Fame and Importance Third!" (and then, in a three-way tie for a distant fourth place...)
"America, or maybe God, or maybe family (if it's not too inconvenient) Fourth?"

Again of course, that would require honesty; something that is not, how shall we put it, "conservatively correct."

Robert Meyer

[This message has been edited by Robert Meyer (edited September 06, 2008).]

Maintain a perspective of reason and thoughtfulness, Anne. Of course, there is dissent. The USA is not a tyranny. Of course it isn't always easy to make your voice heard, but an active opposition exists and speech is free speech, no matter how much the current party in power says "Pipe down".

No heads roll under the executioner's sword, no shots to the base of the skull. No newspaper shut down, no government endorsed burning of subversive literature.

Of course there is dissent against the state.

And much to dissent about. That how democracy works.

PS Naomi Kline Klein

Janice,

Please refrain from the condescending voice. Can you not hear sarcastic hyperbole? Yes, there can be dissent here, but it might land you in jail. Perhaps you are ignorant of the police state surrounding you. It sounds like it. Or maybe you like it, who knows?

I did not intend a condesending tone, Anne.
Apologies if it seemed so.

Anne, if you think this is a police-state you seriously need to spend some time living in Tibet or Mainland China. But first you ought to apologize to those people for the mere suggestion that our suffering is even close to being on a par with theirs.

As for your accusation that Janice was "condescending" she was no more that than you were when you felt the need to explain F.U.B.A.R. to us as if we were ignorant children.

However, not to be outdone, you took it from condescending directly to snarky ad-hom insinuation - and against Janice, of all people.

Nice job. You've trumped even yourself.

Lo

edited to add: crossposted with Janice - who's much nicer than I. I stand by my remarks, however, and while I admire Janice's patience and tact, I don't possess it myself.


[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited September 06, 2008).]

Lo,

Perhaps you need to re-read my statement to Janice about sarcastic hyperbole.

I know it is hard for you to refrain from jumping in and knocking me over the head everytime you see an opportunity. I'm not sure why that is. I try to ignore it, like I did when you said that killing me would be justifiable homicide... remember - I just let that one slide, knowing you can't help yourself.

Janice, I did think you sounded condescending, as if you were implying that no one has been abused and or killed by the current administration. That, topped off by the spelling correction of Klien sounded snarky to me - but maybe it's just me. I can be overly sensetive to criticism, especially on this forum that has often been an unwelcoming place. Okay, Laura, your turn again to try to straighten the whole thing out.

Anne

[This message has been edited by Anne Bryant-Hamon (edited September 06, 2008).]

There's nothing to straighten out. You claimed hyperbole for your first statement, not your second. I was not responding to your hyperbolic first post at all. I was responding to your post to Janice in which you stated Perhaps you are ignorant of the police state surrounding you. It sounds like it. Or maybe you like it, who knows?

I merely pointed out that this is not a police state and that if you thought it was perhaps you should spend some time in Tibet.

The ad-hom came in when you suggested that Janice might be A) ignorant of this blatant untruth you seem to accept as fact or B) aware of it and liked living in one.

You are aware that Janice doesn't even LIVE in The United States, aren't you? Perhaps you are ignorant of what state surrounds Janice. It sounds like it.

Becausee if you weren't you'd understand that Sweden is the least likely country to be considered a police state.

For anyone interested in the exact exchange that Anne has so grossly misrepresented -
http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/ubbhtm...ML/002922.html


posted June 27, 2008 07:30 AM

Originally posted by Anne Bryant-Hamon:

Good thing we can't brandish guns here on this forum, huh!
I'm sure I'd be dead by now.
Anne
______
posted June 27, 2008 09:04 AM

Originally posted by Laura Heidy-Halberstein

ROFLMAO - Justifiable homicide, Anne, justifiable homicide.

(Teasing)

L
_______

posted June 27, 2008 11:34 AM

Originally posted by Anne Bryant-Hamon:

Glad I could be a source of laughter for you, Lo.

Anne
_________

Yes, Laura, I am aware that Janice lives in Sweden, which is why I thought it strange that she would know how things actually are in America.

Well, no, we are not China, but in many ways we have become or are becoming a Police State. There were increments leading up to Hitler's putting people in ovens, just as there are incremental shades of light that lead to sunrise and sunset. It has to be done slowly to keep the people from getting the upper hand.

Here's a page with a lot of links about our emerging Police State I have not read all the links. There are only 24 hours in a day. My prediction is that McCain will win the election and will die in office and we will have Palin as our President for the next four years. I'd like to be wrong about that. I guess time will tell.

Time for Godwin's Law, anyhoe?

Laura,

Invoking Godwin's Law seems to be growing in popularity these days -- not surprisingly. * Godwin's Law itself can be abused as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.* It is an especially handy tool used to close the doors of communication and reign in the free exchange of ideas. Why is it that you are always trying to silence people? Can't you read a discussion without trying to vanquish it?


*this portion of my response was directly lifted from wikipedia*


[This message has been edited by Anne Bryant-Hamon (edited September 06, 2008).]

Oh shut up.

What part of your own statement *Can you not hear sarcastic hyperbole? * did you not mean?

Comparing today's America to Hitler's Germany IS hyperbole, and it remains that way unless you can make a good case proving otherwise - and by "good case" I mean facts, numbers, statistics, and specific instances.

*this portion of my response was directly lifted from one of Anne's posts which I was replying to*



[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited September 06, 2008).]

I'm unsure what you're referring to here, Anne. The "Free Speech Zones" for both the Republican and The Democratic conventions were within two blocks of the actual convention.

And yeah, people were arrested. Just like they were in -'68 - remember that?

For the record: Denver had 141 arrests with no reportable injuries,and Minn had 818 with 1 reportedly treated injury - and that was to an 80 year old delegate that had been sprayed with an unknown substance by a demonstrator. Chicago, in 1968, on the other hand, had 668 arrests, an undetermined number of demonstrators sustained injuries, with hospitals reporting that they treated 111 demonstrators. The on-the-street medical teams from the Medical Committee for Human Rights estimated that their medics treated over 1,000 demonstrators at the scene. The police department reported that 192 officers were injured, with 49 officers seeking hospital treatment.

Again, the convention in Chicago took place 40 years ago - so violence for by and against demonstrators hardly seems like a new phenomena.

Nor is getting arrested.

People that go to demonstrations or counter-demonstrations expect to get arrested. Heck, in DC you even get to choose beforehand if you want to be one of the ones who gets arrested. They ask for volunteers.

Besides which, if I'd have been a cop at the RNC this year and immediately following a peaceful march by thousands of anti-war protestors a few splinter groups embarked on a violent rampage, smashing windows, slashing car tyres, throwing bottles and attacking Republican delegates attending the nearby Xcel Centre, I'd have busted 'em, too. And don't tell me that if you and your children had been innocent bystanders in the area that you would have continued to support their "peaceful" demonstration.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/...tml#cnnSTCText

Nowhere can I find even one instance of a peaceful protestor at eitehr 2008 convention being maced, beaten, manhandled or arrested - unlike the convention in 1968.

I disagee that we're getting worse - I think we're getting better.

http://www.everydayrepublican.com/20...tion-attacked/
http://www.geocities.com/athens/delp.../c68chron.html