NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know, but it ain't lookin' good. :(

No, probably not. Substitute "the world" for "America" and you'd get the same answer from me.

bump

Well I don't see why not, just need some...

Oops. Sorry.

Thought the thread was "Can America be shaved".

Explain your answer. I'll be back in just a minute to explain mine.

What do you mean?
from terrorism?
No.

Saved from what?

JESUS! AMERICA NEEDS JESUS!

Okay sorry, I felt that was appropriate for some odd reason....

JESUS! AMERICA NEEDS JESUS!

Okay sorry, I felt that was appropriate for some odd reason....

I need Jesus, I could take him on tour and finally pay off my damn car, then sell him to Warner Bros. or something for The Passion 2: Return of the Christ, then they could add computer generated characters since it's based today.... yea.... computer generated characters.

what do we need to be saved from exactly? european opinion?

Yeah I chose the last one too...

WHat makes you think I WANT it saved. The World, that is. Humanity, in general, is more or less screwed. Personally, I'm going to enjoy the ride to the bottom. ;) Should be entertaining.

thats an attituude people have enjoyed for thousands of years in their own dismal minds and it seems they die off while the world improves.

what the hell does america need to be saved from?
and please dont give me a list of petty flaws and no lists of things that have been going on forever either. those are not legitimate.

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks.

I'll outline some of the radical changes our nation has gone through, many of which are impossible or damn close to impossible to reverse:

1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

These, and other reasons, make it seem increasingly unlikely that America can be saved.

Saved from what?

Tyranny and/or the complete loss of our sovereignty.

Lunatic Liberals, that's what America needs to be saved from...I'm not talking about your Dull Minded Democrat, I'm talking about your "Save the Environment, Screw Humans" "The Government needs to tax the hell out of me so the poor people who are too lazy to get off their butts can have free healthcare that isn't worth a damn" "Christianity is bad! But Islam is good, teach your kids Islam not Christianity!", type of Liberals.

bump

i agree with roach-busters and rightwing, america was never intended to be an uber-tolerant anything goes nation, as the title of some book goes Its okay to be intolerant because somethings are plain stupid

Are you a Conservative by any chance?
America will always bounce back.
What doesn't kill you,makes you stronger.
Don't be afraid of change.
Your Country is only 500yrs old,for gods sake,don't be so pessimistic.Getting involved in World politics has been mostly good for the UK.
It could be worse,you could be French,then everyone would hate you.

Can't save us. Too many liberals.

Can't save us. Too many liberals.
Wouldn't be much of a country without the liberals.

Wouldn't be much of a country without the liberals.

Yes, but as with deer, if they become overpopulated, then they will starve to death, and destroy the environment. Hunters like me are thus employed to control the population. You see, technically i'm an environmentalist.

Yes, but as with deer, if they become overpopulated, then they will starve to death, and destroy the environment. Hunters like me are thus employed to control the population. You see, technically i'm an environmentalist.
Pfft, they wouldn't be overcrowded if you didn't kill off all the predators and increased the food supply.

I can't argue all those points at once,there was a lot on there.But heres my 2 cents-
1) You are still a very religious nation,from what I can see.I have never met another brit who goes to church,only 2 guys (catholics) but they are Irish.And they avoid it if they can.You put IN GOD WE TRUST on your money,your Politicians make constant references to God.If a British Politician said something like "this is gods country" he would be laughed at,or pelted with eggs.
2)I don't see the Police state thing at all.In the UK,while we have a lot of rights,we have a lot of stupid policies too.And this is the only country I know of where you cannot own a gun.I find that one a bit sinister.A revolution would be hard to get started if we disagreed with the government.And our freedom of speech is being whittled away.

Can't save us. Too many liberals.

:p

I'm a liberal!
I would rather live in a fucked-up liberal country,than a successful Police state :mp5:

I'm a liberal!
I would rather live in a fucked-up liberal country,than a successful Police state :mp5:

It isn't a police state because the hunters of liberals are privately funded, not government owned and operated. Get your facts right.

Oy, I think America's doing fine overall.

Eh, we'll live.

bump

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks.

I'll outline some of the radical changes our nation has gone through, many of which are impossible or damn close to impossible to reverse:

1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

These, and other reasons, make it seem increasingly unlikely that America can be saved.

Yes, yes, YES! Thank you, someone else who knows what's going on! I was worried I'd be the only one in here with that view.

Juris Naturalis all the way... forgot Democrats, Conservitives, or Moderates. America's founders were Juris Naturalists.

America was NOT founded to be a democracy, rather the founders were actually afraid of it. America was founded as a Federal Constitutional Republic.

Correct.

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks.

I'll outline some of the radical changes our nation has gone through, many of which are impossible or damn close to impossible to reverse:

1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

These, and other reasons, make it seem increasingly unlikely that America can be saved.


What about SLAVERY? Don't you think that may have had alot to do with the economic boom of the past? Maybe that could help America out of its economic slump. Just make everyone jobless into a slave, the unemploymernt rate would instantly plummet. Or would you rather America take the traditional route and enslave black people only?

What about SLAVERY? Don't you think that may have had alot to do with the economic boom of the past? Maybe that could help America out of its economic slump. Just make everyone jobless into a slave, the unemploymernt rate would instantly plummet. Or would you rather America take the traditional route and enslave black people only?

I doubt slavery had anything to do with it. And even if it did, nothing could justify reviving it.

I doubt slavery had anything to do with it. And even if it did, nothing could justify reviving it.
Slavery did have something to do with it.

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks.
I'll try and give my opinion on your statements in a respectful manner; I strongly disagree with you on some points, but lets keep this discussion on-topic.


1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

The term here, I think, is not Socialism, and not even its corrupt, bloody, monsterous distortion which is Stalinism (what most call "Communism"). Its Consolidation, Centralisation, Reformism and monopolistic Capitalism as opposed to free-market Capitalism. Socialism in its true original form is about the decomposition of the state apparatus, and its replacement by a network of community-level direct-democracies, not the creation of a Stalinist mega-police-state. Now, the money is unstable exactly because it is based on financial capital rather than on production itself. Gold and silver aren't a really stable gauge for today's economy anyway. But once the entire economy is virtual, and run by brokers rather than by factories, you should expect instability. A decentralised, democratically-planned (from below, not from abouve!) economy is the only hope for preventing the next collpse.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.

Internationalism is not the product of a few ideallistic politicians, but of our technology, economy and means of production. Isolationism would strangle America economically, as no nation could live completely by itself anymore. You need raw materials and technical knowledge of other nations in order to survive in the modern world. Now, the problem here is American imperialism - that is, American politicians thinking that they could enforce their megacorporate monopolist Capitalism and corporate-funded "democracy" on the world.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

Again, that is the work of politicians who were only interested in their own power and the financial gains of their corporate allies. Also, some of them believed that they are the supreme rullers of Earth, and played "a game of chess" with Stalinism, sacrificing Human lives in order to achive their "higher" goals.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

Wait, the Un-American Activities Comittee was important to the security of democracy? They were busy with removing any ideological opposition to the rising monopolies, and, unintentionally, hunting down Stalin's own exiled opposition (Trosky's supporters). The real security risk is, in my opinion, the over-complication and over-technocrat-ization of the intelligence services and pointless sinkholes formoney such as the SDI, instead of the far more efficient HumInt (that is human field agents as opposed to massive listening and ElInt posts). All the expensive electronic espionage was unable to stop Bin Laden. Electronics without common sense behind them aren';t worth anything.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

Religion has nothing to do with democracy and the lack thereoff. Do I have to remind you of several countries which were governed by God, and were tyrannys in the same time? I assure you that most Iranians and Afgans are deeply religious; Are Iran or the Taliban democracies? Was Spain of the Middle Ages a democracy, despite the fact that 100% of its population was Catholic?
Or do I have to remind you of the horrible inequality suffered by women (50% of the Human race) and minorities under the "traditional" US? Going back to the Middle Ages is not the answer; Staying in our current sorry state is not an option either. We must go forward. And Marxism and Darwinism have nothing to do with America's current horrible state. Darwinism is purely a scientific theory, and Marxism (with the proper adjustments) is one of the keys to our salvation. The real culprits here are the monopolist big buisnesses, consumerism, mass-media and mass-marketing. The true values that were lost were Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Faith, the integrity of the community and the individual's right for self-determination. Now wehave niether individuals nor citizens - we have only mindless consumers.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

On that I agree with you 100%. Bush and his oil-industry "associates" and the military-corporate complex don't want any liberty. Liberty is the liberty to kick out the corporations, to choose your own political-economical system. For obvious reasons, the corporate monopolies don't want you to be free in any way. They want you to be a slave to their ever decreasing wages, to their low-quality TV programs, to their horrible mockery of commercialised religion and most of all, to their consumer goods. And soon you will have an "1984" in the US, complete with a secret police ("Homeland Security") and concentration camps (we already have one in Cuba, don't we?). The only diference from George orwell's vision will be that this tyranny will spit out pseudo-capitalist propaganda of "democracy", "freedom", "free market" and "competition" instead of the old Stalinist empty slogans.

America could only be saved by the people, not by the uncaring God or by a politician or another. Only the working people could rid America of the corporate-backed federal beurocracy and bring the power to those it belongs to - the honset masses who build Amrica in their toiling.

Slavery? No. That is completely immoral. That is one of the GOOD changes made in America, ending slavery.

What America needs to do is stop inflation. Sure, that would make the recession worse at FIRST, but after that, things will turn around, and the economy will improve. Also, to help improve the economy, the government needs to stop tryin to run it. And the statist social welfare that America has started to become needs to end. Social Security? Bah! It only allows the government to gain MORE power, and become MORE corrupt!

All these state-provided "welfare" programs need to be gone. They never should have been created in the first place.

Want to know why Social Security was created? Because of the Great Depression, the American people wanted something to rest on incase this happened again. It scared people into giving the government more power over the people.

The government needs reform... it needs to shrink. It's starting to become omnipresent - in other words, getting into everyones affairs, being everywhere at once... being big brother. We don't need that. We can't have that. The more we let it happen, the more power officials get, and the less freedom we have.

By the way, there is a difference between freedom and liberty. Watch out how things are worded. Freedom could mean that the government allows us to have it, but that it can be taken away. We have liberty, we were not given freedom. Liberty is what we have always had, and what we continue to have. Liberty cannot be taken away by the government... freedom can.

Internationalism is not the product of a few ideallistic politicians, but of our technology, economy and means of production. Isolationism would strangle America economically, as no nation could live completely by itself anymore. You need raw materials and technical knowledge of other nations in order to survive in the modern world. Now, the problem here is American imperialism - that is, American politicians thinking that they could enforce their megacorporate monopolist Capitalism and corporate-funded "democracy" on the world.

I'm not proposing isolationism. I'm proposing an end to entangling alliances and an end to sending American boys into foreign conflicts that are of no concern to us.

Kerry wants to repeal the dangerous parts of the Patriot Act.

That alone will be a good start.

Ok, I'm mad, I typed up a page worth of things, and then this forum logs me out... that's one thing I HATE about this forum... *sighs* here I go again, I'll be posting in a few min...

I can save America.

to help improve the economy, the government needs to stop tryin to run it. And the statist social welfare that America has started to become needs to end. Social Security? Bah! It only allows the government to gain MORE power, and become MORE corrupt!

All these state-provided "welfare" programs need to be gone. They never should have been created in the first place.

Want to know why Social Security was created? Because of the Great Depression, the American people wanted something to rest on incase this happened again. It scared people into giving the government more power over the people.
As opposed to the rich having power over the people? Which is what it was before these things were introduced.

again I am with roach almost if not entirely. Just the same folks like us roach should try and save america anyway its a battle that can not and will not be one but I say we fight it anyway, and yes colodia the jesus thing is good to. haha :)

Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever.

Any evidence for claiming that women are more likely to get pregnant under the age of 20 in the US now, rather than 200 (for example) years ago?

Any evidence for your claim that people lie more now than they did 200 years ago?

That they are more dishonest?

That there is more corruption?

My reply to this topic is as follows. If you believe Kerry to be the man who will usher in an age of peace for the United States....you're right. But this comes at a cost much greater then what is promised. And looking back into the history of Mr. Kerry, at an economic and a diplomatic standpoint, America is much safer choosing Bush for the next four years.

Here are the true terms for various lables.

Liberal – According to the Columbia Encyclopedia Third Edition, liberalism “is based, in general, onfaith in progress and in the ability and goodness of man, and on firm belief in the important of rights and welfare of the individual.” Also, “liberalism advocates steady change.” Social freedom; Economic encroachment
Conservative – Says the same source, is “the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order. Conservatives value highly the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform.” Social encroachment; Economic freedom
Moderates – Between Conservative and Liberal, they believe in social AND economic ENCROACHMENT, to a lesser degree.
Juris Naturalis – This is a long-forgotten belief, in which the Founding Fathers believed in, and based America on. Whereas Moderates are located in the center, Juris Naturalists are in the center, too, though with different beliefs. Instead of social and economic ENCROACHMENT, they believe in social and economic LIBERTY. Notice, I said liberty, not freedom. There is a difference.
Freedom – Freedom is a weak word, it can mean that you have an inalienable right to do something, but it can also mean you have only permission to do it. Permission is necessarily granted by someone, which means freedom can be revoked by that someone. It is different with liberty.
Liberty – Liberty was described by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence when he wrote “all men are endowed by their Creator” which certain rights. Liberty is a right endowed by the Creator. It is a part of you, like your mind and emotions, it cannot be revoked. That is was we have in America. Be careful when you hear people speak of liberty and freedom.
Capitalism – Capitalism is another word for free markets. It is an economic philosophy in which says factories, land, office buildings, and the other sources of production and jobs should be owned by private individuals and companies, not government agencies. Capitalism says trade should be unrestricted, the forces of competition will prevent abuses much more effectively than government officials can it the officials permit competition to exist.
Socialism – No free trade or any other kind of freedom. Socialism, says Marxist theory, is a transitional stage between capitalism and communism. It is a “dictatorship of the proletariat” (dictatorship of the working class) in which everything and everybody is owned and controlled by the government for the “good of society.” The purpose of socialism, says Marxist theory, is to prepare the way for communism; this justifies whatever brutal means are necessary to make socialism work. The nations of the old Soviet Empire were the test beds for various degrees of socialism. They all fell apart.
Communism – This, says Marxist theory, is the utopian end-stage of socialism in which government has vanished and we all live happily ever after under the rule, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” You work as hard as you can to produce as much as you can, and contribute it all to the “common stock.” You take from the common stock only what you need. The only places where true communism has ever appeared were a few religious monasteries, hippie communes, and other gatherings of idealists. Such cases have rarely lasted long. Realistically, a person can only be a communist only in the sense that he is striving for the Marxist utopia. But the point to emphasize is the communism is an ideal in which there is [i]no government[/b]. It’s a form of anarchy, in the original sense of the word – no government. If the old Soviet Union had been genuinely communist, with no government, it would have been the least threatening nation on earth.
Welfare statism A form of socialism; it is the most common kind of leftism in the U.S. Almost everyone has come kind of pet socialist program. If it isn’r Social Security it’s Medicare, Aid to Families with Dependent Children or something else.
Until the 1930’s, few Americans believe in any of this. They supported private charities. In fact, Americans had long been known as the most charitable people of earth. But during the Great Depression they were so deeply shaken by an unemployment rate of 25% that most are now afraid to be without some knid of government “safety net.” This has left a leftward bias on the U.S. economy, and conservatives did little to stop it, they were to busy tilting at communist windmills.

I’ll add more tomorrow! g2g

Any evidence for claiming that women are more likely to get pregnant under the age of 20 in the US now, rather than 200 (for example) years ago?

Any evidence for your claim that people lie more now than they did 200 years ago?

That they are more dishonest?

That there is more corruption?
Not if they were in the position to do that... Political power-corrution and dishonesty; those who did not grow up with morals were just as likely to be pregnant under the age of 20. But, with how people were brought up, and what they learned, and the position they were in then, things were much nicer, stats will show in America that people tented to be more honest. The corruption part depends on what they did, etc. g2g

Not if they were in the position to do that... Political power-corrution and dishonesty; those who did not grow up with morals were just as likely to be pregnant under the age of 20.

Well, according to a report based on figures from the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control... read it youself:

Thursday, December 18, 2003 Posted: 1:02 PM EST (1802 GMT)

ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- The average age at which American women are having their first child has climbed to an all-time high of 25.1, the government said Wednesday.

The rise reflects a drop in teen births and an increase in the number of women who are putting off motherhood until their 30s and 40s.

The age of first-time American moms has risen steadily during the past three decades, from an average of 21.4 in 1970. The latest figure, for 2002, was released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Women contemplating motherhood "are more likely to wait," said CDC statistician Joyce Martin. "It's good overall for infant health, because birth outcomes for teen moms are problematic."

The teen birth rate has dropped 30 percent in the past decade to a historic low of 43 births per 1,000 women in 2002. The CDC also said births among women ages 20 to 24 had dropped to 104 per 1,000 women, from a high of 109.7 in 2000.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/parenting/12/17/american.births.ap/

I am aware that a rise in average age of first moterhood does not neccesarilly imply that there are less people getting pregnant in their teens - people may also be getting pregnant for the first time considerably older, but based on what is stated there I take issue with RB's claims.

Before I located that report I was actually more concerned with finding out what the average age of first motherhood was 200 (for example) years ago, because it is my understanding that not only did US women marry younger then but also became pregnant earlier. I seem to recall reading somewhere that most first motherhoods were to people under 20 then rather than over 20, but I cannot recall where. I certainly believe it to be likely that pregnancy under 20 was much more common then than now, but I cannot back it up. That is why I am asking for some figures.

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks.

I'll outline some of the radical changes our nation has gone through, many of which are impossible or damn close to impossible to reverse:

1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

These, and other reasons, make it seem increasingly unlikely that America can be saved.

I agree heartily with most of this, especially the section on morality. If one thing has proven true throughout American history, it is that when people try to change things that are already working well, disaster is imminent. The status quo is the greatest friend of order and stability. When this country was concieved those many years ago, things were as they should be. We were a group of moral, Christian, freedom loving, unobtrusive people. Over the years, people messed around with this, causing vast internationalism, an increased belief in 'democracy' (a word that many people do not understand), and a complete deterioration in morality.

The problem is that the people who want change are sure that what they want is the best, even after it fails. Just look at communism for example. It is impossible to make a person who is that set in their beliefs to recognize the error of their ways.

The only way that I see for America to be returned to its former state is for a massive reduction in the size of government, increased freedom, the destruction of unnecessary committees and organizations that are polluting the system, and the reestablishment of the true federal republic. The greatest evil government can face is government itself.

Well, I can honestly say I was stunned by this post. Normally I see a post with the title "Can America be Saved?" and I can't help but to click on it (I happen to like my country), but I usually give up in disgust as the bashing begins, and others quickly join the all out assualt.

I was stunned that this post was, intelligent, well thought out, and clearly well informed. I applaud. That being said, I only agree with parts of it.

I will firstly state, that I'm a Libertarian, and thus, anything I say will be colored in that direction. I'm also not overly fond of the church, any church, which also obviously colors my opinions. And finally, it is of course, all opinion, not law ;) .

1) Creeping Socialism. I could not agree more. Capitalism, one of the basis of our country is being slowly strangled, and no one is doing a damn thing. Small businesses are wiped out by restrictions, thus increasing the number of monopolies that are created as only larger businesses survive, usually through aforementioned method, shipping their business overseas.

2) Internationalism. If I had my way, every single American soldier that's been scattered across the globe, from the 50,000 in South Korea, to the one's in Germany, to the over half a million in Iraq, would return home. If South Korea fell to the North, its really none of my business. I have the greatest confidence that South Koreans (and North) are fine fighters, capable of defending their own countries if they think it worth the fight. It is this internationalism that is generating terrorists, and ruining our world reputation. If Europe is unhappy with our job in Iraq, I say they are welcome to the country, if the Iraqis want us out, great, I want to go. There is no reason, and more importantly, no right for the United States to set up a Democracy in Iraq. But I digress, Internationalism, is something the Founding Fathers were against, and right be against.

3) Support of Our Enemies, Betrayal of Our Friends. Not much else to say there, I agree.

4) Gutting our security. Stopping the spread of our troops I have already agreed with. Tighter border controls I also agree with. As I understand, member countries of the EU must allow illegal immigrants to remain inside their country as long as they reach their soil (I believe Britain has refused that practice, but I could be wrong). That practice is insane to me, and most certainly a step in the wrong direction. I cannot pass judgement on men like Joe McCarthy. I have always been taught that he was a terrible man, but considering the source of information (liberal High School teacher) I'm thinking much of it could be incorrect. I have not done enough independent research to say anything one way or the other.

5) States' Rights. I agree here as well, states's rights are vital, and being rolled back. We began as a Confederation of nearly separate countries, and steps back in that direction would be a good idea. In fact, in my opinion, reduced government on all fronts would be a good idea.

6) Abandoning our Heritage. Here I disagree, or rather, I only disagree half way. Morality is obviously required, no matter how you cut it. However, it is possible to be a good moral person without being religious. The morals that Christianity teaches (And most other religions for that matter) are fine, but anyone can teach those morals, it is not required to be religious in order to be moral. And too often I find, there are immoral people within churches, who use the trust and faith given to them to create power bases and force their will and views on people. I see the organized church as just another government, with many good individuals but likely an equal number of bad ones, and a multitude in between. Thus to associate with the church is in direct violation of Isolationalism, it is in essence, a form of internationalism. Yes, I understand that is a stretch, but at one point (the Middle Ages) it was true, the church had its own bureaucracy, even its own army. It functioned as a country, with its own political agenda. Yes, I understand that this was the Catholic Church, and America of today is predominately Protestant, a group which broke away from the Catholic church through violence and is certainly not the same thing, but I find that organized religion usually follows a few universal truths. Too many within them have their own, political, immoral agendas.

I do not believe that the loss of religion is the cause of the loss of morality today, because I know morality is possible without the church (I have everyday examples all around me). A return to morality is needed, but it can, and should be done without forcing religion upon anyone. I know you never specifically said that religion would be forced upon anyone, but the following quotes causes me worry:

"those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

By your definition, I am contributing to the risk of outright tyranny. I am not governed by God (I am governed by my own logical morals, that follow the basic tenants of Christianity and many other religions closely) and many of those close to me are not either. Now, since I doubt you're arguing for a tryannical society, and since those who are non-religious, or "not governed by God", contribute to the risk of outright tyranny, I do not think it is any far leap of logic to assume that you are suggesting forced religion on some level, or at the very least, you're suggesting that the non-religious population is immoral, a danger, and a threat (things like those are usually persecuted and or eliminated).

Well aside from being untrue, I would also like to take the time to remind you that two of the basic tenants the Founding Fathers set out were freedom of religion (no religion is included under this tenant) and the separation of church and state. I still stand by these tenants as good ideas.

I think rather than the abandoment of our heritage as a cause of our recent lack of morality as a nation it is overpopulation that is the problem. There is simply not enough to go around. Now before you refute and attack saying that there -is- enough to go around (because you're right, if we went communist and distributed everything evenly there is enough) I am saying that there is not enough -available- resources for everyone. The successful and rich will always horde what they have and keep new competitors out of business. And it is very, very difficult to challenge the establishment, be it business or government. The usually more successful alternative is create your own establishment somewhere else where there is not one. Earlier in our history, this meant moving west, now there is nowhere new to go. People who are desparate resort to violence and crime, desparation defeats morality. Remove the desparation and you can return morality.

I remember a quote that summed this up fairly well, I am afraid I cannot remember it exactly or by whom it was spoken, but it runs something like this:

"A generation ago I would have told a young man, 'Go West and seek your fortune in the wilds', today I would tell that same young man, 'Go West and drown yourself in the Pacific'"

7.The growing police state threat. I agree with this also, not much else to be said.

As to whether or not America will survive, of course it will. Things will have to begin to collapse before anyone does anything, but people will eventually fix things, and then let them slowly decay as they've done since time immemorial.

I hope that I have not attacked or flamed anyone, this was not my intention, if this is what I accomplished during any part of my post, please just tell me and I will apologize.

And finally, my apologies for the long and rambling nature of my post, while I admire your short, decisive, and factual style of posting Roach-Busters, I am, alas, unable to recreate it. Perhaps with time :)

The question should really be:
"Can the rest of the world be saved from america?"

My Note: I've chopped out a bunch of things, look for them in the original post by RB.


1.Creeping socialism- Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.

Of course in the rest of the world, Socialism has led to incredibly high standards of living for pretty much 90% of the population. Meanwhile, in the industrialized and laissez-faire United States, we saw the development of the wealthy 1%. That 1% enjoyed opulent lifestyles. What was ignored was the fact that the vast majority of Americans were on the cusp of poverty. There was still a middle class, but it was not the affluent middle class of today, it was a middle class that had just enough to afford a few luxaries and even then, struggled to make ends meet. In addition to that, the free-market policies contributed to the great depression, leaving the income gap higher than ever.

In regards to the gold standard, money was moved away from gold and silver for a good reason. The economy grew past the U.S.'s ability to back it with gold. A return to gold would result in a massive constriction of the economy because you would have to return our current economy to the level of the gold we have, somewhere around 50% or less of our current economy.

2.Internationalism- I just think that internationalism has made us stronger, not weaker. The international market is a huge part of U.S. revenue.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

The House of UnAmerican activites was dismantled for a good reason. It was essentially a witch-hunt bureau in a time of anti-Soviet paranoia. During its brief career, it accomplished nothing but scaring the populace and going after mostly innocent people (yes, there were some guilty ones). Holding leftist leanings is not a crime, but the HUAA made it one, which was wrong.

5.Destroying states' rights- I agree with you there.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality.

What is it with people and our christian heritage? It isn't there. Look at the founding fathers. Most people were christians, yes, but seperation of church and state is there for a good reason. No one wanted a theocracy and a christian based nation has christian based laws, the result is a theocracy.

7.The growing police state threat- I agree with you there too.

Just one thing BLARGistania, in concern to your following comment:

I just think that internationalism has made us stronger, not weaker. The international market is a huge part of U.S. revenue.

Roach-Busters has already stated that:

I'm not proposing isolationism. I'm proposing an end to entangling alliances and an end to sending American boys into foreign conflicts that are of no concern to us.

This is also what I mean, though I used the word isolationism once or twice, perhaps incorrectly. I did not mean economic isolation, economic isolation is insanity (and impossible).

I am aware that a rise in average age of first moterhood does not neccesarilly imply that there are less people getting pregnant in their teens - people may also be getting pregnant for the first time considerably older, but based on what is stated there I take issue with RB's claims.

Before I located that report I was actually more concerned with finding out what the average age of first motherhood was 200 (for example) years ago, because it is my understanding that not only did US women marry younger then but also became pregnant earlier. I seem to recall reading somewhere that most first motherhoods were to people under 20 then rather than over 20, but I cannot recall where. I certainly believe it to be likely that pregnancy under 20 was much more common then than now, but I cannot back it up. That is why I am asking for some figures.

In the past, people didn't live as long as they do now, so they would naturally marry and have children younger. If I'm not mistaken, life expectancy in the 1800s was barely 60, and the rate of disease was much higher back then than now because they lacked what we have today. So it would be wiser to marry and have several babies sooner so that you could actually have offspring.

Getting back to Roach-Buster's post: I don't agree that curtailing social progress will help. Forcing people into a pre-determined for them "moralistic" lifestyle only creates the police state you fear so much. Societies and the way they think changes- if the U.S.- or any nation for that matter- is to be successful, they have to change with them.

Yes it can be saved if everyone who can vote, does vote. Political apathy and ignorance are the main problems.

The biggest danger are right wing authoritarians.

My Note: I've chopped out a bunch of things, look for them in the original post by RB.



Of course in the rest of the world, Socialism has led to incredibly high standards of living for pretty much 90% of the population. Meanwhile, in the industrialized and laissez-faire United States, we saw the development of the wealthy 1%. That 1% enjoyed opulent lifestyles. What was ignored was the fact that the vast majority of Americans were on the cusp of poverty. There was still a middle class, but it was not the affluent middle class of today, it was a middle class that had just enough to afford a few luxaries and even then, struggled to make ends meet. In addition to that, the free-market policies contributed to the great depression, leaving the income gap higher than ever.

In regards to the gold standard, money was moved away from gold and silver for a good reason. The economy grew past the U.S.'s ability to back it with gold. A return to gold would result in a massive constriction of the economy because you would have to return our current economy to the level of the gold we have, somewhere around 50% or less of our current economy.

I just think that internationalism has made us stronger, not weaker. The international market is a huge part of U.S. revenue.



The House of UnAmerican activites was dismantled for a good reason. It was essentially a witch-hunt bureau in a time of anti-Soviet paranoia. During its brief career, it accomplished nothing but scaring the populace and going after mostly innocent people (yes, there were some guilty ones). Holding leftist leanings is not a crime, but the HUAA made it one, which was wrong.

I agree with you there.



What is it with people and our christian heritage? It isn't there. Look at the founding fathers. Most people were christians, yes, but seperation of church and state is there for a good reason. No one wanted a theocracy and a christian based nation has christian based laws, the result is a theocracy.

I agree with you there too.
Finally. Common sense. I was about to lose hope.

I agree heartily with most of this, especially the section on morality. If one thing has proven true throughout American history, it is that when people try to change things that are already working well, disaster is imminent. The status quo is the greatest friend of order and stability. When this country was concieved those many years ago, things were as they should be. We were a group of moral, Christian, freedom loving, unobtrusive people. Over the years, people messed around with this, causing vast internationalism, an increased belief in 'democracy' (a word that many people do not understand), and a complete deterioration in morality.

The problem is that the people who want change are sure that what they want is the best, even after it fails. Just look at communism for example. It is impossible to make a person who is that set in their beliefs to recognize the error of their ways.

The only way that I see for America to be returned to its former state is for a massive reduction in the size of government, increased freedom, the destruction of unnecessary committees and organizations that are polluting the system, and the reestablishment of the true federal republic. The greatest evil government can face is government itself.
dont forget you have to deport all non christians and non caucasians

i didnt think i would need to reply earlier than the last page but it appears i have to

SPECIAL NOTE: Many of you are bound to heavily disagree with my following statement, which is, of course, my opinion, not fact. I ask that you refrain from flaming, sarcasm, name-calling, or jesting should you disagree. Thanks. i'll just disagree anyway (big surprise eh)



1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies. But even that wasn't so bad. We were still a capitalist country, right? Wrong. Soon, thanks to Edward Mandell House, we had the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Later, the IRS, Social Security, welfare, minimum wage laws, Medicare, Medicaid, the Departments of Education and Transportation, and a host of others were all born. No longer is money stable. No longer is it backed by gold or silver. Businesses are so tightly regulated that many of them are forced to ship jobs to other countries.
free market was fine until we were engulfed by big business. you argue or ignore that big business and monopolies crushed other smaller business's or individual business, you argue minimum wage and hour laws and the like restricted the ability for business's to run, i propose the other, they saved this country from the monopolies that were emploing children and women and poor men for 14+ hour days for pennies a day. we changed to regulate what we HAD TO regulate.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business.
and washington warned us against establishing political parties and polarized partisanship, that lasted about 2 months.
And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. Other than the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and a few minor skirmishes or interventions here or there, we generally pursued a non-interventionist foreign policy. Enter Woodrow Wilson and Edward Mandell House. Both were highly ambitious, ruthless visionaries with dreams of reshaping the world anew. Using treachery and deception, they entangled us in a war in order to "make the world safe for democracy," although why they would want to make the world safe for what our Founders called the worst form of government one can only imagine. Unfortunately, Wilson and House's dreams were not realized, as the brave and patriotic men in the Senate refused to let us join the League of Nations. The League of Nations eventually died. The desire for globalism, however, did not. Enter Franklin Roosevelt. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? FDR, though, bided his time, and finally found the perfect excuse. After failing to provoke Hitler into attacking the United States, FDR decided to enter the war through the back door- by having Japan attack. It worked. After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo. Even now we are simultaneously fighting two undeclared wars, with no end in sight. Moreover, we have NAFTA and the WTO undermining our sovereignty, and NATO obligating us to stick our noses into Europe's business and risk the lives of our boys, such as the war in Kosovo amply demonstrated.
i find it HIGHLY amusing that every name you name is a democrat, what about reagan, bush jr and sr mucking around in affairs that were none of their business? if you wanna be fair name the republican post boys pulling the same shit that you just happen to be naming democrats for. you argue we stay out of all foreign affairs, whether they ultimately concern us or not. fine saddham should have been allowed to take over kuwait and do whatever to iran. we should leave the UN or at least stop trying to enforce their policies since it is none of our business, though it may potentially start affecting our economy and supposedly great standard of living that would result from un-controlled big business

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends- Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Draza Mihailovich, Chiang Kai-shek, Fulgencio Batista, the Bay of Pigs fighters, Syngman Rhee, Bao Dai, Boun Oum, Nguyen Cao Ky, Nguyen Van Thieu, Lon Nol, the Hungarian Freedom Fighters, Vang Pao and his Hmong guerrillas, the Shah of Iran, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Ian Smith, Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, the government of South Africa; these are just some of the loyal friends who blindly put their trust in us, only to have us turn their backs on them and throw them away like unwanted toys. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.
yeah i agree, presidents keep fucking that shit up

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.
the un american activities committee was a liberal witch hunt, you think they wouldve stopped when they rooted out every person that actually WAS a socialist infiltrator, and being a socialist in and of itself is not a crime, unless you are aiding and abetting the enemy or actively suggesting taking hostile action against the government (which was advocated by john locke ironically), being one is not aiding and abetting. and lets revisit the fact joe mccarthy destroyed himself, he was put on for all the country to see what he was doing and he got thrown out. spreading our troops to thin needs to be fixed, keeping active bases near hotspots for deployment is one thing, just throwing bases everywhere is another. a liberal thought is no more illegal or dangerous to our nation than a conservative one, i argue it is much less so, as can be seen by reviewing your beliefs and comparing to the reality of the situation would it have been let to continue

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.
that is brilliant. just brilliant. you admit segragation is wrong but intergration is bad, do you propose we have deported all african americans? kept them segregated for the sake of peace? let the americans be more intolerant and bigoted? it is NOT the state's right to oppose civil rights because they feel like it, every human is entitled, and guaranteed by the constitution,the protection of their rights to life, liberty, and property. the states cannot play bigot for the people it governs. if people refuse to be tolerant, tolerance must be forced upon them. the no child left behind act is bullshit and is a boon to its own purpose. gay marriage amendment is illegal, but by the very constitution that governs this nation, without the aid of the amendments, the states must recognise the marriages of people in other states, things like that are the very purpose of the full faith and credit clause. it IS up to the states whether or not to allow abortion, though allowing it may be easier and better at length than disallowing it because it will still happen, things that do not have to carry between states can be reserved to the states.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.
no of course children wernt obligated to say under god, IT WASNT IN THE PLEDGE UNTIL THE 1950S! are you implying it is non christians alone that arnt law abiding or decent citizens? i do believe we had crimes and murder before those ideas came to our shores, not to mention intolerance and biggotry whcih is supposed to not even exist in christianity, christians are hypocrites. the ACLU supports civil liberties, only the hypocritical bigots which compose the upper majority of christianity claim it to be anti christian. and if you really want to impress me, quot some one who partook in the writing of the constitution, john adams wasnt even communicating with the authors, at least jefferson pulled that, and it was jefferson that COINED the term of separation of church and state. and william penn's statement is assumption and 200 years old. i do believe george w. bush is a ridiculously religious person, to the point of saying God supported his war against terrorism, yet he is one of the biggest tyrants in our history. and i have researched your bullshit about religion being removed from schools some time ago: the increase in teen pregnancies started booming when "abstinence ed" classes were introduced into school systems, not before. prostitution is the oldest known profession, it predates christianity, referencing it is ignorant, and i do believe there were crooks and thieves before christianity. increases in drug abuse came more as the government started outlawing stuff, remember, every drug that is illegal now, except for engineered ones recently, were used by the medical profession years ago: opium, cocaine, marijuana is also very old. you are ignorant or naive, i submit both

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed. which is IRONICALLY because if a very religion, very christian man which is IRONICALLY the very same as william penn suggested control this nation.

i will give you your quotes now from those who actually penned our constitution

James Madison -

Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731).

Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In the strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation?
The establishment of the chaplainship to Congs is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority shut the door of worship agst the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain! To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the veil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.

If Religion consist in voluntary acts of individuals, singly, or voluntarily associated, and it be proper that public functionaries, as well as their Constituents shd discharge their religious duties, let them like their Constituents, do so at their own expense. How small a contribution from each member of Cong wd suffice for the purpose! How just wd it be in its principle! How noble in its exemplary sacrifice to the genius of the Constitution; and the divine right of conscience! Why should the expence of a religious worship be allowed for the Legislature, be paid by the public, more than that for the Ex. or Judiciary branch of the Gov. (Detached Memoranda, circa 1820).



im getting really annoyed at being signed out of this forum in the middle of shit

I would like to urge people to read the series of "Uncle Eric" books by Richard J. Maybury. Rather you buy it or check it out of your local library, trust me, it will make you think... and it will make you look at America from (likely) a different perspective.

It is a different view than more Americans in the 20th century have, but very similar to that of the 18th 19th century from the founding of America through the mid to late 1800s. It is also the view that the founding fathers took.

Of course America can make a come back, but it will be a long and difficult road. First and foremost. We must take a look at our stances. We must decide what is most important. America or the world? I'm not saying that we should revisit our days of isolationism, for in sense, we can't. But its time that we said, "No more free handouts."

Look around you! America is falling apart. Our education and healthcare systems are in the dumps, poverty is on an increase and the economy is spiraling downward. Do I really care that Iraq has a good education system, if my own children can barely get the books they need? I think not. Do I care that people in Africa get free medication, yet I have to go and pay thousands of dollars to get one vile? (meaning that America should focus on our own needs, before giving everything away, not trying to be socialist). This is a harsh way to think, but take a look at reality. America cannot keep saving the world everytime one little thing goes wrong. Its time that we took a look at our own domestic issues before funneling all our money abroad.

Another important issue we need to address is that without our allies, we are nothing. Much can be done to improve our world image, and this must be done. Sure, we can go off and fight terrorism, but in the end, we'll be right back were we started. If we alienate our allies, then who will be there to support us? Who will stand up and say, 'you can't attack america, because that is like attacking us!"? Most of the world hates us, that is understandable. But it hasn't always been that way. Not all Americans are bossy, pushy and greedy. Many of us are just simple folk that are enjoying life and trying to make the best out of everyday. Many people don't understand that America is a big place. I live in Central Texas, and its a lot different than say New York or Washington state, but we all learn to get together in the end. I have a good friend on NS, and we are good friends in real life. He may live far away, but we're still friends, despite our differences. The world needs to realize that America is doing what it thinks is best, and we sacrifice quite a lot. We've given our hard earned money to you, we've spilled the blood of our family members for you, and what do we get in return? Hatred, and murder.

America needs to access its priorities, help those in our own country, or help those that don't give a damn in another. Who should we help? The people who are waving an American flag on Independence Day, or those burning them in Palestine?

1.Creeping socialism

This is probably the area where I most agree with you. Although I would rate global competition as the biggest force in sending jobs to other countries. (However, America is still a net IMPORTER of jobs.)

2.Internationalism-After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin

FDR was dead by this time. It would have been President Truman that made this decision. However, I agree with much of the rest of your thoughts in this section.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends-Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

Here's where I start to disagree with you, in the particulars. Many of the despots you mentioned were never our friends. It took some mental jiu-jutsu for you to paint them in that light. However, I do believe we should treat our true friends better, and do a better job of identifying false friends (are you listening, France?). We also need to more ruthlessly destroy our enemies, for they are utterly ruthless.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

OK, this is where I really disagree with you. Bringing back McCarthy and the HUAC would repair our national security? Nope. Even though I think much of what McCarthy said was correct, the way he went about achieving his goals was totally unacceptable from a civil rights standpoint. The "spreading thin" of our armed forces is certainly a problem, but can be dealt with in a straightforward manner. We must do something to secure our borders immediately.

5.Destroying states' rights

The civil rights movement did not destroy states' rights, and neither did Lincoln. That destruction was caused by modern American liberalism, via all-encompassing regulation (Interstate Commerce Commission, anyone?) and left-wing activist judges. I do agree with your comments regarding Bush's education and gay marriage policies.

6.Abandoning our heritage

We diverge greatly here. America is a pluralistic society; everyone is free to practice their religion, as long as those practices are legal (e.g., human sacrifice is not allowed). I do agree that Christians are coming under undue duress from, again, left-wing activist judges and organizations. It sure looks like some are determined to persecute them right out of American society. However, the parts of our heritage whose abandonment distresses me most are the free market economic system and rewarding of the entreupreneurial spirit.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

I disagree with your representation of the Patriot Act. The particulars regarding civil liberties will be worked out through the court system, but much of the Patriot Act simply consolidated other legislation, such as the RICO statutes used to fight organized crime, and applied them to situations involving terrorist activity. While Homeland Security is a typical bureaucracy, it has done some good in improving our national security.

i get sick and tired of the right wing bullshit whining about activist judges

Here are the true terms for various lables.

Liberal – According to the Columbia Encyclopedia Third Edition, liberalism “is based, in general, onfaith in progress and in the ability and goodness of man, and on firm belief in the important of rights and welfare of the individual.” Also, “liberalism advocates steady change.” Social freedom; Economic encroachment
Conservative – Says the same source, is “the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order. Conservatives value highly the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform.” Social encroachment; Economic freedom
Moderates – Between Conservative and Liberal, they believe in social AND economic ENCROACHMENT, to a lesser degree.
Juris Naturalis – This is a long-forgotten belief, in which the Founding Fathers believed in, and based America on. Whereas Moderates are located in the center, Juris Naturalists are in the center, too, though with different beliefs. Instead of social and economic ENCROACHMENT, they believe in social and economic LIBERTY. Notice, I said liberty, not freedom. There is a difference.
Freedom – Freedom is a weak word, it can mean that you have an inalienable right to do something, but it can also mean you have only permission to do it. Permission is necessarily granted by someone, which means freedom can be revoked by that someone. It is different with liberty.
Liberty – Liberty was described by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence when he wrote “all men are endowed by their Creator” which certain rights. Liberty is a right endowed by the Creator. It is a part of you, like your mind and emotions, it cannot be revoked. That is was we have in America. Be careful when you hear people speak of liberty and freedom.
Capitalism – Capitalism is another word for free markets. It is an economic philosophy in which says factories, land, office buildings, and the other sources of production and jobs should be owned by private individuals and companies, not government agencies. Capitalism says trade should be unrestricted, the forces of competition will prevent abuses much more effectively than government officials can it the officials permit competition to exist.
Socialism – No free trade or any other kind of freedom. Socialism, says Marxist theory, is a transitional stage between capitalism and communism. It is a “dictatorship of the proletariat” (dictatorship of the working class) in which everything and everybody is owned and controlled by the government for the “good of society.” The purpose of socialism, says Marxist theory, is to prepare the way for communism; this justifies whatever brutal means are necessary to make socialism work. The nations of the old Soviet Empire were the test beds for various degrees of socialism. They all fell apart.
Communism – This, says Marxist theory, is the utopian end-stage of socialism in which government has vanished and we all live happily ever after under the rule, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” You work as hard as you can to produce as much as you can, and contribute it all to the “common stock.” You take from the common stock only what you need. The only places where true communism has ever appeared were a few religious monasteries, hippie communes, and other gatherings of idealists. Such cases have rarely lasted long. Realistically, a person can only be a communist only in the sense that he is striving for the Marxist utopia. But the point to emphasize is the communism is an ideal in which there is [i]no government[/b]. It’s a form of anarchy, in the original sense of the word – no government. If the old Soviet Union had been genuinely communist, with no government, it would have been the least threatening nation on earth.
Welfare statism A form of socialism; it is the most common kind of leftism in the U.S. Almost everyone has come kind of pet socialist program. If it isn’r Social Security it’s Medicare, Aid to Families with Dependent Children or something else.
Until the 1930’s, few Americans believe in any of this. They supported private charities. In fact, Americans had long been known as the most charitable people of earth. But during the Great Depression they were so deeply shaken by an unemployment rate of 25% that most are now afraid to be without some knid of government “safety net.” This has left a leftward bias on the U.S. economy, and conservatives did little to stop it, they were to busy tilting at communist windmills.

I’ll add more tomorrow! g2g

Good definitions, good post.

In the past, people didn't live as long as they do now, so they would naturally marry and have children younger. If I'm not mistaken, life expectancy in the 1800s was barely 60, and the rate of disease was much higher back then than now because they lacked what we have today. So it would be wiser to marry and have several babies sooner so that you could actually have offspring.

Yup, that is my general view of the matter, and I would not be in the least surprised if there was a much greater incidence of women getting pregnant in their teens in the age which Roach-Busters seems to be harking back to, as opposed to now. I do not have figures to back this up though, I am wondering if R-B has figures to back up his claim.

Lack of effective contraceptives should also be noted when talking about such a period, I guess.

i get sick and tired of the right wing bullshit whining about activist judges

Yes, I know it sucks hearing truth that contradicts your view of the world.

What do you even know about it? I work for a large legal publishing firm, and have the opportunity read legislation and case law every day. Some of the decisions by those activist judges would astonish any reasonable American. But not those with ideological blinders on, I guess.

1.Creeping socialism- Our Founding Fathers, and most of their successors, purused laissez faire policies, and generally kept their noses out of the private sector's business. Free-market policies brought us wealth, prosperity, and standards of living like never before seen in history. In the early 20th century, that began to change. First, came the progressives, with their strong regulatory policies.

2.Internationalism- Our Founding Fathers solemnly warned us about avoiding entangling alliances and refraining from intervening in affairs which were none of our business. And, until the 20th century, with only a few rare exceptions, this wise advice was followed. A lifelong, radical internationalist, and fervidly pro-war interventionist, FDR longed to entangle us in World War II, but faced a serious challenge: a massive movement of peaceful, non-interventionist Americans who were sick of fighting foreign wars. WWI had brought fascism to Italy, Nazism to Germany, and communism to Russia. What would this new war bring? After doing everything in his power to rile the Japanese, they attacked Pearl Harbor, and non-interventionism became a thing of the past. For almost half a decade, Americans fought, not for their nation as many of them believed, but for Roosevelt's perverse longing for a new world order. His plan worked. We are now entangled in the United Nations. The cost in blood, tears, cash, and agony was staggering. Even though the war was allegedly won, our politicians set the stage for a new war. After forcing Patton's Third Army to withdraw west and allow the rapacious Soviet hordes to engulf Berlin, FDR set the stage for the betrayals of the brave, peace-loving, long suffering people of Eastern Europe, our ever-faithful and loyal friends. In addition to Eisenhower's barbarous Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly relocated millions of people who had escaped Stalin's hell on earth, the politicians sold out loyal friends of America in China, Poland, Yugoslavia, and other nations. Many of the people who were forcibly relocated had even worn our uniform and fought valiantly alongside us. Of course, not everyone wanted to make the trip. Many committed suicide after killing their own children. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. Undeclared wars, 'police actions,' and 'humanitarian missions,' occurred by the score.

3.Support of our enemies, betrayal of our friends. A large percentage of the afore-mentioned men were authoritarian dictators. Many killed scores of their own people. While nothing excuses their atrocities, a generally overlooked fact is that many of them were forced to adopt these measures in response to national crises and resort to draconian means to prevent their nations from falling into the wrong hands. Rather than help them in their time of need and help gradually reform their governments and restore liberties, we abandoned them, often causing war, suffering, and bloodshed of epic proportions that cost the lives and freedoms of millions of people. Moreover, many of these nations were then under the control of ardently anti-American thugs, terrorists, and despots who not only oppressed their own people (usually far worse than their predecessors), but who wished to oppress the people of other nations as well, including ourselves. At the same time, we provided enormous financial aid to nations that would love nothing more than to obliterate us from the face of the earth. We traded with them, tried in vain to resolve our differences through diplomacy, but to no avail. Indeed, we usually treated our friends like they were our enemies, and our enemies like they were our friends.

4.Gutting our security- From the destruction of men like Joe McCarthy and Otto Otepka, to the careless and sloppy policies that allowed hundreds of security risks to flourish in our federal government, to the dismantling of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, to our thin spreading of our troops to over a hundred countries in the world, to the opening of our borders, never before has our security been at such a risk.

5.Destroying states' rights- Beginning with Abraham Lincoln's bloody war that cost over half a million lives, the sovereignty of our states has crept closer and closer to the brink of destruction ever since. One of the biggest blows to the concept of states' rights was the 17th amendment. Now that senators are directly elected, rather than appointed by state legislatures, destroying the original purpose of the senate, which was to represent state governments at the federal level. Then came the civil rights movement. While many people were rightly appalled at the morally bankrupt, racist policy of segregation, forced integration was not the solution. It did not change behavior or end racism. It did, in fact, incite riots, instigate tension between whites and blacks that erupted into full-blown battles which nearly destroyed cities and killed many people, and bring the nation to the brink of anarchy. States' rights were flushed down the toilet. Now, the federal government has each of the states on a tight leash. Even today, with the No Child Left Behind Act and Bush's proposed gay marriage amendment, attempts are being made to destroy states' rights completely.

6.Abandoning our heritage- Prior to the introduction of Darwinism, Marxism, and other philosophies to our shores, America was an almost entirely Christian nation. While children were not obligated to say "under God," prayer and Bible reading were common in schools, sessions of Congress opened with prayer, and the vast majority of Americans were decent, law-abiding people who believed in mom and apple pie morality. Then, in the 20th century, people like John Dewey, with his 'progressive education' which virtually destroyed the quality of our schools, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose antics which led to today's draconian anti-Christian stance of our schools, the rabidly anti-Christian ACLU, sexual psychopath and all-around fraud Alfred Kinsey, and the radical, pot-smoking freaks of the 1960s, trashed our morality and heritage, resulting in lawlessness, immorality, and epic disaster. Now, dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime are pervasive and occur with greater frequency now more than ever. Ignoring John Adams' statement that "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other" and William Penn's warning that "those who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny.

7.The growing police state threat- This is probably the issue that most concerns Americans. Today, more than over, America is in great danger of becoming a replica of Hitler's Third Reich. From the Department of Homeland Security to the gestapo-like misnomer 'Patriot' Act, our liberties are being drastically curtailed.

These, and other reasons, make it seem increasingly unlikely that America can be saved.
1. Before the labour laws and anti-trust laws were introduced in the early 20th century, America was a corporate hellhole. Worker's rights were virtually non-existent. The major cities were filled with dangerous sweatshops. The only people who enjoyed prosperity were the corporate CEOs! And you also had a little economy-booster called slavery before 1865...

2. Isn't there something in the US Constitution which requires the US government to adhere to international treaties it signs? There's nothing saying: "Don't sign international treaties!" I actually agree with some of this paragraph, most of America's interventions are unneccesary. As for 1941, I don't doubt that FDR wanted the US to enter WW2 to prevent a Nazi victory. He was right. If the US had not fought on the Allied side in WW2, it would only be a matter of time before Britain was overrun. Certainly D-Day would never have happened. Once Hitler had defeated his enemies in Europe, don't think he would stop there. Hitler had dreams of world domination. He wanted to establish bases in Greenland in order to bomb North America, but Allied soldiers were stationed there and in Iceland to stop him. The rest of what you complain about are the results of being a big superpower.

3. I agree with a lot of this. However, remember that in many cases, such as Iran, the US toppled elected governments who were good for their people, replacing them with autocrats who killed their people. I also think that it is naive of you to believe that all the dictators that the US supported ever intended to restore civil liberties.

4. Agreed, the US doesn't need to have its troops in 100 countries. Regarding your defence of that scoundrel Joe McCarthy and HUAC, I know that there was a small communist conspiracy in the US government. But that does not give politicians a blank cheque to crush people's freedom to hold whatever political beliefs they like. Do you know that many lives were ruined by McCarthyism?

5. I'll start with the 17th Amendment. Surely it is better to have the Senate actually elected by the people who are affected by its decisions. Slavery was not a states issue, it was a human rights issue, as was segregation. I think you greatly exaggerate the problems caused by forced integration. Brought the nation to the brink of anarchy? No way! You forget that there was also much racist violence during the time of segregation. Black people were murdered nearly every day of the week in racist attacks. A 1919 example is of a black teenage boy swimming in a whites-only part of Lake Michigan, and getting stoned to death.

6. You seem to think that Christianity is inseparable from morality here. The introduction of new philosophies? It's called modernisation. Those new philosophies didn't destroy America, but they did stimulate independent thought. Is your real problem with that? By "anti-Christian" I assume you mean secular. You may remember that your constitution prohibits laws respecting particular religions. Do you view the pasrt through rose-tinted glasses? Dishonesty, corruption, lying, theft, prostitution, drug abuse, teen pregnancies, and crime all existed in abundance in the "good old days". How do you figure that many Americans contribute to the risk of outright tyranny, by liberally excercising their civil liberties? You can't prove something on quotes alone, particulary from tyrants like John Adams.
Besides, most of the founding fathers of your nation, including George Washington, were deists, and Thomas Paine was atheist.

7. Totally agreed. Oh, and don't forget your hero John Adams' 1798 Sedition Act and Alien Act.

--------------

This is a good thread, but you fail to address two other huge threats to America:

1. The two-party state. Voters need a real choice. All they have is two very similar parties. This kind of bipolar political situation is unhealthy. It contributes to the hatred between the "conservative" and "liberal" camps. It suffocates all the other political philosophies, such as libertarianism, socialism and environmentalism. I thin you agree with this, indeed you said it best, that "America will just keep electing an idiot from one side or the other" - something to that effect.

2. Corporate influence on parties. Corporate donations must be banned. These days corporations have more say in government policy than the people who elect the government. I know you don't like democracy, but do you think this is right?

Yes, America can be saved, but there isn't much time, probably no more than 30 years. By that time, technology will have grown to the point that we will be ruled by either a metaphorical Patrick Zala or Architect. If we overcome our brainwashing now, we stand a fair chance of saving America, though.

Also, I read a bumpersticker that said "defend America, defeat Bush".

Here are the true terms for various lables.

Liberal – According to the Columbia Encyclopedia Third Edition, liberalism “is based, in general, onfaith in progress and in the ability and goodness of man, and on firm belief in the important of rights and welfare of the individual.” Also, “liberalism advocates steady change.” Social freedom; Economic encroachment
Conservative – Says the same source, is “the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order. Conservatives value highly the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform.” Social encroachment; Economic freedom
Moderates – Between Conservative and Liberal, they believe in social AND economic ENCROACHMENT, to a lesser degree.
Juris Naturalis – This is a long-forgotten belief, in which the Founding Fathers believed in, and based America on. Whereas Moderates are located in the center, Juris Naturalists are in the center, too, though with different beliefs. Instead of social and economic ENCROACHMENT, they believe in social and economic LIBERTY. Notice, I said liberty, not freedom. There is a difference.
Freedom – Freedom is a weak word, it can mean that you have an inalienable right to do something, but it can also mean you have only permission to do it. Permission is necessarily granted by someone, which means freedom can be revoked by that someone. It is different with liberty.
Liberty – Liberty was described by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence when he wrote “all men are endowed by their Creator” which certain rights. Liberty is a right endowed by the Creator. It is a part of you, like your mind and emotions, it cannot be revoked. That is was we have in America. Be careful when you hear people speak of liberty and freedom.
Capitalism – Capitalism is another word for free markets. It is an economic philosophy in which says factories, land, office buildings, and the other sources of production and jobs should be owned by private individuals and companies, not government agencies. Capitalism says trade should be unrestricted, the forces of competition will prevent abuses much more effectively than government officials can it the officials permit competition to exist.
Socialism – No free trade or any other kind of freedom. Socialism, says Marxist theory, is a transitional stage between capitalism and communism. It is a “dictatorship of the proletariat” (dictatorship of the working class) in which everything and everybody is owned and controlled by the government for the “good of society.” The purpose of socialism, says Marxist theory, is to prepare the way for communism; this justifies whatever brutal means are necessary to make socialism work. The nations of the old Soviet Empire were the test beds for various degrees of socialism. They all fell apart.
Communism – This, says Marxist theory, is the utopian end-stage of socialism in which government has vanished and we all live happily ever after under the rule, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” You work as hard as you can to produce as much as you can, and contribute it all to the “common stock.” You take from the common stock only what you need. The only places where true communism has ever appeared were a few religious monasteries, hippie communes, and other gatherings of idealists. Such cases have rarely lasted long. Realistically, a person can only be a communist only in the sense that he is striving for the Marxist utopia. But the point to emphasize is the communism is an ideal in which there is [i]no government[/b]. It’s a form of anarchy, in the original sense of the word – no government. If the old Soviet Union had been genuinely communist, with no government, it would have been the least threatening nation on earth.
Welfare statism A form of socialism; it is the most common kind of leftism in the U.S. Almost everyone has come kind of pet socialist program. If it isn’r Social Security it’s Medicare, Aid to Families with Dependent Children or something else.
Until the 1930’s, few Americans believe in any of this. They supported private charities. In fact, Americans had long been known as the most charitable people of earth. But during the Great Depression they were so deeply shaken by an unemployment rate of 25% that most are now afraid to be without some knid of government “safety net.” This has left a leftward bias on the U.S. economy, and conservatives did little to stop it, they were to busy tilting at communist windmills.

I’ll add more tomorrow! g2g

Where do you guys think America is on this list? Or is there another lable you think America is at? Not talking about what most people believe in. But the country its self, what category, if any?

Do you notice it's almost always "Don't let Bush get into office!" or "Don't let Kerry get into office!" instead of "Get Kerry into office!" or "Get Bush into offer!" (respectively)

Do you notice it's almost always "Don't let Bush get into office!" or "Don't let Kerry get into office!" instead of "Get Kerry into office!" or "Get Bush into offer!" (respectively)
yeah you notice that once you start asking for what president bush;s is running on, even most of the dummies can't come up with logical bullshit to support it

Yip... except it's not just Bush, same thing goes for Kerry. If you've noticed, Kerry is very socialist in some issues. But, look at Bush - he wants encroachment on your personal lives. So, which do you choose - socialist economy or personal encroachment?

Err with all these defeinitions...i'd think twice of accusing our silly candidates of being socialist. Maybe looking onward left?

Yeah I thought the comment that a complete free-market gave our nation prosperity was funny. Standard of life couldn't be lower. Atleast in our socialist economy of a nation we have a nice beaurcratic post office and other cool government owned beuracrtic things.

The "god" found on our nation was mostly introduced in the 1950s McCarthy era. Americans believed that since communism was "anti-god" then all atheists are communists. So a major fervor pushed for "under god" in the pledge, and many other god relics..etc. (no "under god" was never added to insult peoples who believe in "gods"...just the "communists" aka atheists)

The "god" placed in our currency was added after the civil war, once more in response to human nature to blood-shed. Otherwise our nation was pretty secular.

We are a social conservative nation, because of so many chruch-goers and religious people. Our grandparents were quiet the opposite, to speak for the majority.

These things go back and forth. The generation growing up today will be much like the hippy generation of our grandfathers. Our parents, being the killers of disco and rebellion when they entered their 20-30s and took hold to our nation will be fogotten. American social history is quite interesting. For every conservative generation, they will breed a new liberal generation. It goes to show that balance is required or people are being oppressed, with each coming liberal generation..liberating and then going back into the shadows. Our nation will be a liberal nation. And one day "immoral" as the Netherlands or Europe. But people are happy and thats all that matters in the end.

Its time to liberate!

i find it HIGHLY amusing that every name you name is a democrat, what about reagan, bush jr and sr mucking around in affairs that were none of their business? if you wanna be fair name the republican post boys pulling the same shit that you just happen to be naming democrats for. you argue we stay out of all foreign affairs, whether they ultimately concern us or not. fine saddham should have been allowed to take over kuwait and do whatever to iran. we should leave the UN or at least stop trying to enforce their policies since it is none of our business, though it may potentially start affecting our economy and supposedly great standard of living that would result from un-controlled big business

Well, since I attacked the Grenada intervention, I was attacking Reagan; likewise, my criticism of Iraq and Somalia are both stabs at the Bushes.
that is brilliant. just brilliant. you admit segragation is wrong but intergration is bad, do you propose we have deported all african americans? kept them segregated for the sake of peace? let the americans be more intolerant and bigoted? it is NOT the state's right to oppose civil rights because they feel like it, every human is entitled, and guaranteed by the constitution,the protection of their rights to life, liberty, and property. the states cannot play bigot for the people it governs. if people refuse to be tolerant, tolerance must be forced upon them. the no child left behind act is bullshit and is a boon to its own purpose. gay marriage amendment is illegal, but by the very constitution that governs this nation, without the aid of the amendments, the states must recognise the marriages of people in other states, things like that are the very purpose of the full faith and credit clause. it IS up to the states whether or not to allow abortion, though allowing it may be easier and better at length than disallowing it because it will still happen, things that do not have to carry between states can be reserved to the states. [/QUOTE]

You misunderstood me. I don't think the races should have been separated in the first place. But forcing them together was not a good idea, either. I believe segregation should have been dismantled gradually, by the state and local governments.

Do you know that many lives were ruined by McCarthyism?

None were ruined. That's one of most enduring myths and is completely false. Whenever pressed to name somebody McCarthy allegedly ruined, critics either stammer and sputter like idiots, trying to think of a name, or they name somebody that was never the focus of a McCarthy investigation. And McCarthy didn't just go around targeting random citizens. Each and every person he accused of being a communist either a communist, a pro-communist, or at the very least, a security risk. I gave a bibliography of great books about McCarthy in a different thread. I'll see if I can find it for you.

I'd like to commend everyone for keeping this thread intelligent, respectful, and flame-free. Thanks, everyone! :)

bump

None were ruined. That's one of most enduring myths and is completely false.

Except that it isn't. There are thousands of pages of now-released secret testimony that have been released that show McCarthyism at its finest - and how McCarthy didn't publically call witnesses that stood up to him.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/05/mccarthy.hearings/
http://www.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate12cp107.html

Not a single person called by McCarthy was ever convicted.

I'll grant you, the names of people whose lives were ruined for years don't come trippingly off the tongue, but that's a failure of education.

And McCarthy didn't just go around targeting random citizens

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030509.html


Conservative historian Paul Johnson reports in A History of the American People that "[t]here is no evidence that he ever identified any subversive not already known to the authorities and the only consequence of his activities was to cause trouble and distress for a lot of innocent people and discredit the activities of those genuinely concerned to make America safe."

So explain to me how Aaron Copland, the composer, was a security risk?

Each and every person he accused of being a communist either a communist, a pro-communist, or at the very least, a security risk.

You left out ex-communist. Philip Loeb, remember? The chap that killed himself as a result of being named by McCarthy. You conceded before that not all communists were security risks, so why should they have been targetted?

And while we're at it, any figures for your teenage pregnancy claim?

Well, since I attacked the Grenada intervention, I was attacking Reagan; likewise, my criticism of Iraq and Somalia are both stabs at the Bushes
the names wernt named

You misunderstood me. I don't think the races should have been separated in the first place. But forcing them together was not a good idea, either. I believe segregation should have been dismantled gradually, by the state and local governments.
the state and local governments had no intentions to work torward integration, that is obvious through the fact the federal government had to enforce integration through military intervention. you can sit around espousing states' rights all day, but that doesn't mean shit when state rights start counter acting civil rights.


you are obviously intelligent so i have no idea how you are that naive

states' rights are great, but you cannot give states the rights to decide when and or if they want to protect civil liberties, the people will not become accepting of other races and cultures until they are taught to accept them, and that does not happen until it is enforced to end the endless cycle.

in a perfect world there is no need to pretend there is a perfect world.

So explain to me how Aaron Copland, the composer, was a security risk?
he must've been a liberal, thus a risk to national security, DUH :rolleyes:

And while we're at it, any figures for your teenage pregnancy claim?
i know full well the figures, though not exactly, but i DO know that they more than doubled after "abstinence ed" classes were added into the school system and became required classes (1989 government report from a committee on this crap)

Can America be saved? Yes. But we'll have to reform our FAVORITE institution, the corporation. The problem with them is that they have different instincts then human beings, so they just to ANYTHING for more money and power, buy competitors (Adam Smith said we need fair competition in the free market, but he didn't know about corporations that can eat and assimilate each other), shady political deals, fire employees, no matter how many people they hurt. They control our information, our goods, HELL I can't even own enough land to farm my own damn food anymore, because corporations have become the gatekeepers to our goods and services, all.

The solution? Encourage the growth of coop businesses with bylaws written to encourage hiring, good wages, and benefits, even for low-skill labor, to replace private, power-hungry corporations. We could even give them a tax-credit, do it all the time for normal businesses. Henry Ford payed his employees more than was normal for the day, why? So they could buy a Model-T. And I'm not talking about hippy communes. There was a system of coops set up in Mondragon (accent on last 'o', how do I do that?), Spain that has succeeded in becoming a major producer of consumer goods for all of Europe. If you go to Europe and see a product labeled "Fagor" it was made in the Mondragon coops. They show (as well as all the successful coops here in USA, food, cans, housing and food for college students), that coops can work. The key to their success is to not try and be environmentalists as well as coops. A good coop just competes in the market for the consumer's business like everyone else.

Reasons for liberalism and "welfare state":
Free market only works out best for everyone in the "ideal market", a set of conditions I shall list:
1.Everyone starts with the same amount of wealth.
2.There're no freebies outside the market to be accessed.
3.Nobody can buy or sell people and businesses, only goods and services.
4.Goods all start in similar abundance.
5.Everyone starts with the same education.

In America we have never had these and shall never have.

By the way, did anyone ever stop and think that the reason our "education" scores are always going down is because they're supposed to? Because our system of cumpolsory schooling is set up along Prussian lines in order to produce an obediant yet academically skilled population of wage slaves? So because noone wants to be a slave like that, and the cultural "importance of education" factor goes down with each generation schooled, every generation is less motivated to do well in school. So the numbers show it. To find out the details, go to www.johntaylorgatto.com

Kerry and Bush both suck ballz. Switch to proportional representation and elect David Cobb President in 2004!

Saved from bees right? Bees are the problem? cause I said yes, we can be saved. Saved from bees...

I'll grant you, the names of people whose lives were ruined for years don't come trippingly off the tongue, but that's a failure of education.

Zero Mostel

Yeah it can be saved, but it'll take a lot of work.

Meh, the way I see it, the commies will eventualy get elected into white house, and we'll all be screwed, all thanks to liberal hollywood and all those annoying subliminal pop-ups. Well, not for long, especialy with people like me around.

Meh, the way I see it, the commies will eventualy get elected into white house, and we'll all be screwed, all thanks to liberal hollywood and all those annoying subliminal pop-ups. Well, not for long, especialy with people like me around.

Liberal hollywood.... grrr... damn them all. But I don't see the commies being elected into the White House.

Or at least if the commies do get in that'll be the day I find a remote island and declare myself an independent nation.

What liberal Hollywood? Michael Moore and his comrades are independent from the Hollywood film companies, using that bastion of democracy known as FREE SPEECH to further their own political ends. If they end up revealing some aspect of truth while doing it, great!

When the Sun is gone, due to an Eclipse, you'll note a Sharp end of the American economy.

Please speak in English. Not everyone here understands your national language.

Please speak in English. Not everyone here understands your national language.

People, people, people, please let this thread die already.

Not a chance. Well unless the Mormons are right and the second coming of Jesus will be in Utah someplace.

I really hate all those fundamentalist Christians. If the second coming occurs by random quantum chance, I'm gonna threaten to kill Jesus unless he gets rid of them.

Probably not. Nothing lasts forever, you know.

america is doomed. :(