American Hyper-sensitivity

fbaezer wrote:

Please tell me if the following is an anti-American statement:

When Condoleezza Rice, in the Senate hearings, asked about the recent human disaster in Asia, answered that the tsunami in Asia was "a marvelous opportunity for America" to strenghthen ties with countries like Indonesia in a strategy that "has paid us good dividends", she reflects, bluntly, the true soul of the US government. No heart, only interests. It's clear to me that, at least in this case, the American people (and let me put Bi-Polar Bear's efforts in fund raising as an example) are ill-reppresented.

I would only say that if you are going to use this single statement as a reflection of representation of citizens of the US you would be doing yourself an injustice.

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Quote:
Thus far, the American government's response to the tsunami has been rather exemplary.

I think that Americans in general have responded better than our government. Wouldn't it be nice to tone down the inaugural and give that money to either the Tsunami victims or our troops in battle?

Expensive political parties have always been held, and rarely are there no other ways to spend the money. I would like to take a hard look at all of our present spending, but I wouldn't single out the inauguration; it makes a partisan issue of something quite routine. In defense of the political parties -- including Bush's inauguration -- they provide people with an expression of their political voices. The majority of this country chose a president, and the fanfare of the inauguration has always gone to the victor.

0 Replies

The only fanfare regarding this "inaguration" are the corporate payoffs for return favors from this Administration.

0 Replies

That's too much cynicism for me.

0 Replies

Dookie's full of it.

..... "Cynicism" I mean.

0 Replies

Ahh, O'Bill, lighten up. Sometimes I just like to mess with people. Wink

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

fbaezer wrote:
Please tell me if the following is an anti-American statement:

When Condoleezza Rice, in the Senate hearings, asked about the recent human disaster in Asia, answered that the tsunami in Asia was "a marvelous opportunity for America" to strenghthen ties with countries like Indonesia in a strategy that "has paid us good dividends", she reflects, bluntly, the true soul of the US government. No heart, only interests. It's clear to me that, at least in this case, the American people (and let me put Bi-Polar Bear's efforts in fund raising as an example) are ill-reppresented.

I would only say that if you are going to use this single statement as a reflection of representation of citizens of the US you would be doing yourself an injustice.

(my bold)

I believe many misunderstandings arise from the inability of some to make a difference between the government and the people.
The paragraph I wrote underlined the difference. I think both Steppenwolf and Dookiestix -albeit with different opinions about the content- grabbed it. It seems that McG did not.

0 Replies

Light as a feather, Cav... you weren't the only Canadian who bristled there... Country pride is an affliction most of us seem to share. You're just so damned nice; you make the perfect example. :wink:

0 Replies

fbaezer wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
fbaezer wrote:
Please tell me if the following is an anti-American statement:

When Condoleezza Rice, in the Senate hearings, asked about the recent human disaster in Asia, answered that the tsunami in Asia was "a marvelous opportunity for America" to strenghthen ties with countries like Indonesia in a strategy that "has paid us good dividends", she reflects, bluntly, the true soul of the US government. No heart, only interests. It's clear to me that, at least in this case, the American people (and let me put Bi-Polar Bear's efforts in fund raising as an example) are ill-reppresented.

I would only say that if you are going to use this single statement as a reflection of representation of citizens of the US you would be doing yourself an injustice.
(my bold)

I believe many misunderstandings arise from the inability of some to make a difference between the government and the people.
The paragraph I wrote underlined the difference. I think both Steppenwolf and Dookiestix -albeit with different opinions about the content- grabbed it. It seems that McG did not.

The government is the group of people that represent the citizens of the US. That's what I said. I think you may have misuderstood what I wrote.

You wrote "No heart, only interests. It's clear to me that, at least in this case, the American people are ill-reppresented."

You said this in relation to reading a single statement by C. Rice and I believe you to be incorrect in your assessment. We (the citizens of the US) are not ill-represented because our government (those that represent us) have given grat amounts of aide and money to the victims of the tsunami.

I (as a citizen of the US) expect my government to look out for our countries best intersts. I want them to think, not feel their way through foriegn relations.

0 Replies

McG, may I ask, after your response: Do you consider that any criticism to your government is equal to criticism to the people of the United States and your country as a whole?

0 Replies

I consider how the criticism is said, the context of the criticism, and the speaker of the criticism.

Very little criticism is aimed at the actual citizenry of the US. I'd say the majority of it is aimed directly at the government.

However, since the government is not here to defend itself, I choose to do so in it's stead, as it represents me. I love my country and I do not enjoy seeing dispersions cast it's way whether they are called for or not.

Surely you can understand that.

0 Replies