I love every concept the Statue of Liberty stands for � that individual liberty is held above the objectives of government � that, as Washington and Jefferson said, America imparts good will toward all and threatens no one � that this country is so big-hearted and prosperous it can welcome people from all over the world fleeing oppression or poverty.
I love the Bill of Rights � the most noble document ever written to define the limits that government should obey.
I love the concepts of free speech, absolute privacy and religious freedom embodied in our traditions and our Constitution.
I love the rule of law � the right of accused persons to confront their accusers, the right to an attorney, the right to remain silent, the right to refuse admission to government officials wanting to enter your home or office.
These are just some of the things that have made America unique in the history of the world. They are a direct cause of America's prosperity, of our security, of what makes America attractive to so many would-be immigrants.
The "hate America" crowd
Unfortunately, too many Americans seem to have little love for that America.
They are quite willing to throw away the concepts I've described � in order to satisfy a lust for revenge against the September terrorists.
They're willing to abandon our cherished liberties � giving the government the power to do anything it wants. They assume � falsely � that such invasions of liberty and privacy won't affect themselves, even though the history of government demonstrates that what's applied against suspected terrorists today will be applied against innocent Americans tomorrow.
They're willing to abandon free speech � wanting to shut up those who don't join in the rah-rah cheering as President Bush abandons the essence of what made America unique and great.
They're willing to abandon the rule of law and transform America into a police state � where any law-enforcement agency, military court or intelligence agency can act as prosecutor, judge and jury to decide your future.
They're willing to let innocent Americans die � by encouraging our government to bomb innocent foreigners at will, almost guaranteeing that there will be further terrorist attacks against us.
They're willing to continue transforming what was once a worldwide love of America into a hatred for America � caused by the correct perception that American presidents believe they can force any foreign nation to do their bidding.
They make no objection when congressmen pass bills � without reading them first or having any idea what's actually in them � bills that take away your liberties, pile more government debt on your family, and give the president the power to do whatever he wants, as though he were a Roman emperor.
Words and deeds
These people may not actually hate America. They may even profess to love America, but they show no understanding of what made America the precious nation it is. Here is what some of their sentiments amount to:
Contrary to the American respect for peace-loving people, they think our hurt entitles us to hurt others � even people who didn't hurt us.
Contrary to the American tradition of individual responsibility, they want to treat all Afghans as though they're bin Laden, and all Iraqis as though they're Saddam Hussein � making no distinction between the innocent and the guilty.
Contrary to the American ideal of individual liberty, they think freedom may be a nice concept but state security is more important.
Contrary to the American tradition of independent thought, they assert that questioning your government is unpatriotic, paranoid and tantamount to treason.
Contrary to the distrust of government that marked the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they think that � despite all the mistakes our government has made � allegiance to the fatherland is your highest duty.
Contrary to the American way of good will toward all, they acknowledge that America is being transformed into an armed fortress, but say that's the price we must pay to be a superpower. Those aren't the sentiments of people who recognize what made America the most attractive place on earth to live. But in the supreme irony, these people label those who protest against the destruction of American ideals "America-haters."
Where do you stand?
Do you love America?
If so, isn't it time you spoke out on behalf of America � before the president and Congress take away the rest of what made this the land of the free?
Or are you just as happy to see America transformed into one more bureaucratic warrior state, like so many of those in Europe and Asia?
I love America � the one symbolized by the Statue of Liberty � the America that was the beacon of liberty, providing light and hope and inspiration to the entire world. I want that America back.
The war-mongers may say they're patriotic Americans, but they're willing to discard everything unique about America in order to satisfy their lust to avenge the September tragedy.
The desire for revenge is understandable. But the rush to permanently abandon the wonders of America to satisfy a temporary rage is not.
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Amen. From a Canadian.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote:Contrary to the American tradition of individual responsibility, they want to treat all Afghans as though they're bin Laden, and all Iraqis as though they're Saddam Hussein � making no distinction between the innocent and the guilty.
Not the only, but possibly the biggest lie in the entire column.
Of course, playing the race card is like an autonomic function of liberal thought, anymore. The old Straw man: "They disagree with us because they're racist!" Crap.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
And of course, the standard reply for any conservative, no matter the situation, is "stop playing the race card!"
"Senator, why did you rename French Fries as Freedom ..."
"STOP PLAYING THE RACE CARD, DAMN YOU!"
Whatever.
And, Rob, your denial that our government's current leadership is borderline facist is quite amusing. I'm glad that you don't care that our rights are being infringed upon, but I'm sure that'll change when our Monkey and vice-Monkey realize people are catching on.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Fascist? You don't know the meaning of the word.
Posted by Epoch (Member # 136) on :
I'm inclined to agree with First. I find it rather funny that we the majority of the people in this country (atleast I assume we are the majority, I mean we keep voting in all of these facist leaders after all) are to ignorant to know that we are having our rights infringed upon. I have yet to go any where and have my rights withheld from me in any way. So the continued use of this as supporting fact in your arguments is utterly pointless.
I admit that I'm not in full agreement with going into Iraq at this time. However I feel that we are going to need to go in there in the near future.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote:Originally posted by Epoch: I find it rather funny that we the majority of the people in this country (atleast I assume we are the majority, I mean we keep voting in all of these facist leaders after all) are to ignorant to know that we are having our rights infringed upon
Don't make me go there.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I have yet to go any where and have my rights withheld from me in any way."
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Probably the single most violated constitutional right in this country. Basically, it says that anything not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution is left up to the individual states to decide for themselves, or for the people to decide: the federal government is supposed to take a backseat. Anything you're not allowed to do by federal law, which isn't in the Constitution, and which isn't against state law, is a violation of your rights. Even if you don't have any desire to do it, the very fact that they tell you you can't is a violation.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
The federal government has been violating our rights for all eternity, if only by the fact that you pay taxes to support unconstitutional federal programs. Which is why we need a major Constitutional overhaul.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
That would be a fun thing to watch, given the Canadian experience with constitutional change. Not that I'm against it (or for it), I'm just saying it would be a fun thing to watch Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Erm... Wouldn't it perhaps be more logical to fix the gov't to fit the Constitution, rather than vice versa? Especially considering that the gov't, as it stands, is broken?
Posted by Daryus Aden (Member # 12) on :
Don't be so logical.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
I can't wait to see Omey's proposed Constitutional reform, should be worth a laugh or two. 8)
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Well, mainly, it'd be making some things that the government already does legal. Federal control of American airspace, for example.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Airspace? Airspace!?!? C'mon, how do you expect to get anything interesting going with that. At least include something about Quebec being a distinct/unique/prima donna province to spice up the constitutional debate Posted by Daryus Aden (Member # 12) on :
Under your new constitution, whose jurisdiction would migratory herds come under?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Whatever worked, of course. Posted by Daryus Aden (Member # 12) on :
Perfect political answer. That is to say, you didn't answer the question at all. Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Of course. I know nothing of the subject, after all, so I have no position. Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
I think an Amendment to change CNN to the 'War Channel' should be included....
Posted by Antagonist (Member # 484) on :
Hurrah! And an amendment limiting the amount of free coffee and donuts. Seriously, I don't mind paying taxes on a $20,000 hammer, but buying coffee from Starbucks last week alone for the entire White House staff put the U.S. another 2 trillion into debt.
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
quote: Which is why we need a major Constitutional overhaul.
The Homeland Security act is bad enough. Conservitives would destroy what few rights we have left if a constitutional Convention were called. Omega moves up a few notches on the THEM list.
How about ringing in on that one First of Two? Want to call a convention?
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Bang goes that whole pesky separation of Church & state thing, for one.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
That can't be all bad. Maybe they'll reinstate the Order of Templar Knights into the army. Like, Texas Rangers in white uniforms with maltesian crosses. And a Document of Certificate in their breast pocket, explaining how they'll get into paradise if they die by the hands of the Saracen's infidel cousin, the Iraqi.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Conservitives would destroy what few rights we have left if a constitutional Convention were called.
And how do you derrive that...
Bang goes that whole pesky separation of Church & state thing, for one.
...and that, from anything I have ever said? Oh, wait. You can't. You're just pulling them out of your respective asses.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Just trying to make you feel at home. My, we're touchy today.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Oh, goodness, I don't like being lied about. Imagine that.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Conservitives would destroy what few rights we have left if a constitutional Convention were called."
"And how do you derrive that..."
"Bang goes that whole pesky separation of Church & state thing, for one."
"...and that, from anything I have ever said?"
Sounds more like it's based simply on a knowledge of conservative politicians. I hate to break it to you, but, were a constitutional convention held, you would have little to absolutely no personal effect on its outcome.
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: [QB] Conservitives would destroy what few rights we have left if a constitutional Convention were called.
And how do you derrive that...
conservitives would have the utility workers spying on everyone. And we'd need numbers on our skin, to make it easy to keep track of all the liberals.
If the liberals were in charge, and the convention was called, it would be just as bad. Political correctness could become law. Either way, Constitutional Convention=Bad.
As for Vogy's comment. They don't call it the religios right for nothing.
Can you imagine trying to make this a one god only country? Or forceing schools to teach Creation. United Soviet States of America.
USSA does have a nice ring to it.
We have a constitution that has stood the test of time. It doesn't need to change, we need to change. The only real fault I have with it is that it didn't free slaves from the start. It took four years of war, and thousands of dead men for that to happen.
In case you can't tell, I don't think very highy of either side.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
As for Vogy's comment. They don't call it the religios right for nothing.
Yes, all... eight of them. Or perhaps we should start characterizing all liberals as being exactly like the dozen or so women who cheer over the million or two murders of unborn children every year?
conservitives would have the utility workers spying on everyone. And we'd need numbers on our skin, to make it easy to keep track of all the liberals.
Um... no. No. And further, no. That's just paranoia, plain and simple.
We have a constitution that has stood the test of time. It doesn't need to change, we need to change.
Except that times have changed. Are you suggesting we should just eliminate air travel all together? High-speed communications? Just so we can change circumstances back to what the Constitution was designed to fit?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"conservitives would have the utility workers spying on everyone. And we'd need numbers on our skin, to make it easy to keep track of all the liberals."
"Um... no. No. And further, no. That's just paranoia, plain and simple."
Yeah, they wouldn't do that. Didn't you know they can implant trackable computer chips subdermally now? Numbers on the skin... Pfft!
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
The Constitution already grants the federal government power over interstate commerce, so what is the point about air travel?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Not all air travel is inter-state. And under any circumstances, that "inter-state commerce" clause needs to be greatly clarified. It's one of the most abused sections of the Constitution.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
quote: Maybe they'll reinstate the Order of Templar Knights into the army.
I had a funny reply here, but then I read it and realized, hey, this funny reply does not mean what I thought it meant while I was writing it, but in fact just the opposite. And now I'm all confused and lost.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Which reminds me, I still need to finish Deus Ex.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:dozen or so women who cheer over the million or two murders of unborn children every year?
Three questions for, Omychops.
Omega - what is the definition of murder?
Omega - is abortion illegal?
Omega - since abortion is not illegal, how can it be considered murder?
Thank you for opening your mind to the wonder that of deductive reasoning.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I'll keep that argument in mind the next time the death penalty comes up.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
I don't know why keeping in mind the arguement that homeschooling produces brainless twits will help you.
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
quote:Not all air travel is inter-state. And under any circumstances, that "inter-state commerce" clause needs to be greatly clarified.
It has been, and you will be glad to know that the Supreme Court disagrees with you.
quote:It's one of the most abused sections of the Constitution.
Do you have any specifics?
[ March 22, 2003, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Post deleted.
You're right, Jay. I'm just having a bad weekend.
[ March 23, 2003, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: Nim ]
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
That was unnecessary.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"It's one of the most abused sections of the Constitution."
"Do you have any specifics?"
I believe the interstate commerce clause is the one used by the government as an excuse to federally regulate drugs like marijuana and such.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)