Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Craven, it must take you HOURS each morning grooing that mustache and beard! Don't they tickle?

Au -- Remember Lux? Lux was always a very effective detergent.

Craven


Whining that is all the left ever does. Nothing positive ever issues out of your ramblings. All I see is expression of grief, pain, or dissatisfaction . I guess that is the way of radical left.

if there is a radical left on this forum i have not seen it.

Following upon (1) our Prime Minister's announcement that the government plans to decriminalize possession of marijuana for personal use, and (2) the local Vancouver initiative to offer facilities for heroin users to shoot up under medical supervision... the US government has thought it ought to send a parade of officials up here to let us know it isn't happy with Canada. The latest visit, from David Murray, special assistant in the Office of National Drug Policy carried the typical threats, "I think the loss of the mutual cooperative partnership we've had with Canadians regarding our borders, regarding the integrity of the hemisphere, regarding our commerce, regarding the implications of trade and value to ourselves, the loss of that would be something truly to be regretted". Murray repeated, rather a few times, the phrase "unintended consequences" which might ensue, "We would have no choice but to respond."

More and more, we love America's humility, love of diversity, and respect for automony of other nations and cultures.

Dys
If radical left does not suite you how about just left.
The fact remains that all we get is whining from the left. It started with the anointing of Bush and never stopped. It was more than two years for that crying,pissing and moaning to stop.
Max.
I told you I could sour relations all by myself.

au, I am far from the left. But that's a label that I'm not going to los sleep over. I just note my extreme dissatisfaction with that label.

I agree that nothing positve results from petty whining. I avoid it whenever possible, though I'm sure I do my share of pettiness.

I disagree that that is all that any political inclination does. It's simply false to say that either side only whines.

I raised a specific issue which is the complaints about the imbalance.

You do not need a host of people who agree with you to have a point. That some political views are outnumbered is not relevant to their ability to address the issues discussed. I maintain that complaining about the demographics is a disservice to those who complain. Their opinions are not any less valid solely on the basis of it being a rarity.

I also addressed another specific issue about yourself and others complaining about unamerican activities. I really do understand where your frustration comes from, in such a polarized climate it is inevitable that people on both sides will find fault wherever possible and since many here have a major qualm with the current governing body it is inevitable that their dissatisfaction can be construed as dissatisfaction with the nation. I have seen this on both sides, you calling certain opinions unamerican and othes saying gay rights etc are "destroying America" But ultimately peoople here disagree with what's good or bad for America. For this reason it is pointless to simply label dissenting views as un-American. That is usually the core of the debate. What is or is not good for America.

I really wish the political minority here would speak up about their opinions as much as they complain about their opposition's opinions.

dys: I think it is a matter of "You can't see the forest because you are a tree" thingy.

I typed that response before you decided to repost your whine. Nevermind, carry on complaining about how you think others just complain.

I'll savor the irony elsewhere.

I find it illuminating that the same statement can be construed as a cold hard fact by some, and a "whine" by others.

Radical left is now, of course, anything south of Mussolini.

Au...the US has, on a number of fronts, become an ugly force in the world. That ought not to be surprising, as such could be properly said about the British previously, or the Dutch, or the French, etc.

Criticisms levelled against certain US behaviors and policies by anyone here do not carry the additional claim that the US is mainly evil, or unusually destructive, or uniquely ugly. The idea is that we are going to be much closer to the truth if we assume the US is typical, not specially exempt from failings.

If one can be adequately humble and de-mythologized on that liklihood, and if we acknowledge that what failings are there can be hugely significant in a world the US dominates, then we'd all be fools and lousy citizens in ignoring or shutting up about them.

The real conundrum for me is what consequences you (or others) fear will arise from such criticism or indictments of American policy and ideas. What is the danger in such criticism?

Cold hard fact that ALL an entire political affiliation ever does is whine?

Et tu max? Have you gone to that rhetorical level as well?

I'll be the first to concede that a alid factual complaint can be called a whine as a rhetorical tool. I did it a few times today.

But stating that the people who disagree with you are incapable of anything but whining is a bit of a stretch.

Craven
My comments were made in response to Tartarins statement.
Haven't seen much of Timber, Asherman, and Perception lately, have you? Too much lux?
How would you interpret that statement? A little gloating, we chased those people away?

As goldie so astutely points out, they don't ALWAYS whine...




...sometimes they gloat, too.

IMO it's unhelpful. I also do not think it's correct to assert that they ran them off. That is particularly untrue.

What made me respond was the pat on the back issue. Both sides do it ad nauseum, complete with the locker room butt slap. How would I interpret those statements? Probably along the lines that you do with several notable exceptions (the main one is what I have been harping on re portraying it as un-American). I do take issue when the baseless generalizations are brought out.

Do people whine? Yes, quite frequently. Do both sides do it? Yes, especially the side that's not in power. It's not exclusive to either side and it's certainly not an exclusive activity of any side.

Craven
Does this look familiar


I believe you made it . You seem to be calling the kettle black.

au

It is a disappointing notion you carry in your last post. Neither Tartarin, nor Craven, nor myself, nor anyone I can think of want any person or viewpoint to be drowned out or to disappear.

There have been some posters in the past who fell to a level of chronic personal insult and innuendo, rather than engage in discussion or provide links to further information or otherwise keep the issues up front. But that is a complaint about how conversations here ought to go to be valuaable, not about political leaning.

I was just thinking about that. It can easily look like it was mant to indicate exckusive activity. I did not mean it that way. I used the word in an admittedly unclear meaning in which I refer to the fact that you will not cease labeling others as un-American. I wish to clearly state that I do not maintain the opinion that it is all you are capable of.

Now I was just gonna call max the pot but it shouldn't be used twice in a row. Max, I'll have to get back to you on that.

That was eloquent and appreciated, Craven. And Blatham, that's shocking stuff you've reported about US pressure on Canada. We need to publicize that. I'm behind on reading the NYTimes (pile of papers on the coffee table scowling at me every time I walk by, but I've no time to read). I'll look for a report in the Times and if I don't find one within a couple of days, will email Herbert and Krugman -- that usually gets results over time. If you could email me a link to a press account of all this, I'll send it along to them.

Au, what is very unpopular with those who are not supporters of the status quo is what we could call the Limbaugh-izing of discussion. You often post intelligent, interesting things, but your response to many posts is pure Limbaugh. This is a media figure who, among others, inflates self and point of view by lying, sidestepping the truth, and doing so in a manner which entertains the unthoughtful, un-independent listener. It diminishes your credibility (in my mind, at least) and the value of your opinions. Because so often they don't seem like your own opinions, but merely an echo of the tiresome, sharp but thin buzz saw we hear so often in the media.

Blatham kindly says: "Criticisms levelled against certain US behaviors and policies by anyone here do not carry the additional claim that the US is mainly evil, or unusually destructive, or uniquely ugly." But I couldn't agree with the belief that we Americans are not wholly responsible for "certain American behaviors." We are responsible, either because we have a working democracy and put these guys in power OR (and this is what I believe) we've let democracy slip through our fingers and are at fault for that very reason.

blatham
That is how I read Tartarin's statement. I see no other interpretation. Sorry to say.

Craven
That is the third time you talked about me labeling people UN American.
I don't remember ever having used that term. I do remember asking Tartarin which side of the border she lived on. At the time I was naive enough to believe that an American citizen would not denigrate the US. I have since been taught differently on a2k. Never too old to learn.

Au -- This is an honest question looking for an honest and open answer from you. Do you believe that there are ideas and opinions which should be proscribed here (and elsewhere in the US)? And if so, what would they be?