1
   

Are we spoiled?

 
 
baddog1
 
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:17 am
Copy & pasted from email:


The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right?

The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3s of the citizenry just aren't happy and want a change.

So being the knuckle dragger I am, I starting thinking, ''What we are so unhappy about?''

Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?


Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved. Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.

Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings.

Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. All in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents.

Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers!

How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.

Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has
ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S., yet has a great disdain for
its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the
world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have, and what we
hate about the country instead of being thankful that we live here.

I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from further terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?

Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discharge after a few days in the brig.

So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it
leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash
with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the
corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They
offer what sells, and when criticized, try to defend their actions by "justifying" them in one way or another. Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife, but if he did, this is how he would have...... Insane!

Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off
the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your
bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is
exponentially more good than bad.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,846 • Replies: 30
No top replies

 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:19 am
How very un-American.

I thought "the pursuit of happiness" was an essential American right.

This is all fatalistic and "so you have no health insurance and your job's about to be outsourced and your son's in Iraq, that's too bad, it's America, love it or leave it."
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:28 am
Oh what's that word..... you know the one?..... it's right on the tip of my tongue....... ohhhhhh........

Yeah!

Jingoism!
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:44 am
I think that perhaps whoever wrote that email has been unconscious for the last 8 years
0 Replies
 
Terry
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 11:11 am
Just because most Americans are materially better off than the inhabitants of other countries does not mean that we should be complacent when we see our president making political decisions that will affect the quality of life for us, our children and/or the rest of the world.

Wanting what is best for all concerned does not mean we are spoiled. Why should we happily settle for less, just to satisfy the political ambitions of a man who seems to be completely out of touch with reality? I'm sure he would like to have free rein without having to justify his actions to anyone, but thankfully the media is still free to inform - and the people are free to choose who to believe.
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 12:24 pm
My initial answer was - Of course I am spoiled and I love it!

I think, however, your statements are oversimplified. You are assuming that all that makes us happy is money and material things. Assuming then that the majority of those in the US are better off financially, if anything, then the President's low approval rating would be in part that we don't care so much about material things.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 02:40 pm
I wish the news media was showing shots of kids selling lemonade on the street corners of Baghdad. The reason the news media isn't showing those scenes is hardly the fault of the news media.

So I should shut up and be happy that I am safe and not care about anyone else? I am sorry. I will be damned if I will be happy when people are being maimed and killed in my name.

Shame on the person that wrote this email for failing to care about anyone but themselves and shame on you Baddog for repeating it as if it has some merit.
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 08:33 pm
parados wrote:
...Shame on the person that wrote this email for failing to care about anyone but themselves and shame on you Baddog for repeating it as if it has some merit.


Ridiculous and incredibly arrogant assumption parados! Shocked
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:51 pm
baddog1 wrote:
parados wrote:
...Shame on the person that wrote this email for failing to care about anyone but themselves and shame on you Baddog for repeating it as if it has some merit.


Ridiculous and incredibly arrogant assumption parados! Shocked


Sorry, but it seems fairly accurate to me. The writer of this letter is basically telling everyone who speaks up about the incredibly pompous, arrogant, foolhardy and dangerous way that our country has been behaving of late that they should shut up and be happy because they are well off and rich.

Well, apparently, for 70% of Americans being rich and healthy is not all that counts -- those 70% are ashamed because the world is being ravaged and terrorized in their name.

If you are among that 30%, you are basically making a statement that you don't give a **** about all the rest of the world that has to suffer to make Americans rich.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 10:04 pm
Is it Baddog?

There is almost nothing in that list of what we should be grateful for that can be traced to Bush. Yet somehow we should be grateful to Bush for the electricity and running water that he had nothing to do with? Who is really being arrogant Baddog?
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 07:55 am
parados wrote:
Is it Baddog?

There is almost nothing in that list of what we should be grateful for that can be traced to Bush. Yet somehow we should be grateful to Bush for the electricity and running water that he had nothing to do with? Who is really being arrogant Baddog?


Quote:
...and shame on you Baddog for repeating it as if it has some merit.


Your arrogant assumption above is the part I was referring to.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 08:07 am
So you don't think it has some merit?
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 08:19 am
sozobe wrote:
So you don't think it has some merit?


Obviously I feel it has some merit - or else I would not have copied & posted it. You feel it has merit, parados and others feel it has merit - or else there would've been no response. What's your point?
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 08:29 am
Then Parados' "arrogant assumption" is right on target.

That's all he said -- "respeating as if it has some merit."

Either he's wrong and you don't think it has some merit -- which you deny -- or he's right that you do think it has some merit -- which you confirm.

I guess an assumption can be both arrogrant and correct, though. <shrug>


Meanwhile, posts entirely devoid of merit are often receive replies pointing out their lack of merit.
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 08:39 am
Quote:
Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from further terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?


I just threw up all over my keyboard.
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 09:50 am
sozobe wrote:
Then Parados' "arrogant assumption" is right on target.

That's all he said -- "respeating as if it has some merit."

Either he's wrong and you don't think it has some merit -- which you deny -- or he's right that you do think it has some merit -- which you confirm.

I guess an assumption can be both arrogrant and correct, though. <shrug>


Meanwhile, posts entirely devoid of merit are often receive replies pointing out their lack of merit.


Actually parados said:
Quote:
...and shame on you Baddog for repeating it as if it has some merit.


I consider it offensive for someone to accuse me (or anyone else) of being shameful for relaying another's opinion - when I have not laid claim one way or another! Now if I had said: "I agree with the person who wrote and/or emailed the article to me..." - then certainly one could conclude that I should be shameful, or not - given their position. Therefore in this case - parados made a claim (that I should be shameful) based entirely on his/her assumption of my position on the matter! That action is rarely beneficial in any meaningful debate.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 01:49 pm
I was right so that makes me wrong? Laughing

One doesn't have to agree or disagree with something in order for them to be reprimanded for repeating it. There are many things my parents wouldn't have let me repeat even if I didn't agree with the statements. You ought to be ashamed for repeating this tripe, baddog. The fact that you did so without comment doesn't absolve you.
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2007 07:24 am
parados wrote:
I was right so that makes me wrong? Laughing

One doesn't have to agree or disagree with something in order for them to be reprimanded for repeating it. There are many things my parents wouldn't have let me repeat even if I didn't agree with the statements. You ought to be ashamed for repeating this tripe, baddog. The fact that you did so without comment doesn't absolve you.


Interesting twist parados. Not sure why the animosity about the "tripe"; perhaps it hits a bit close to home for you - and since you can't lash out directly to the author, you have a need to lash out at someone. So be it. What a shame.:wink:

Now - about the subject...
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2007 07:55 am
I dealt with the subject here

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2500174#2500174

For someone that accuses others of supposed "arrogant assumptions" you seem to be making a lot of assumptions yourself. But you have now come full circle and clearly acted in the same manner for which you repudiated me.

Does that mean you knew your original accusation was wrong when you made it or have you now changed your mind about the appropriateness of shaming others? I'm just curious how you justify it now.
0 Replies
 
baddog1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2007 08:13 am
parados wrote:
I dealt with the subject here

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2500174#2500174

For someone that accuses others of supposed "arrogant assumptions" you seem to be making a lot of assumptions yourself. But you have now come full circle and clearly acted in the same manner for which you repudiated me.

Does that mean you knew your original accusation was wrong when you made it or have you now changed your mind about the appropriateness of shaming others? I'm just curious how you justify it now.


I read your comments shown on the link above, which are vague at best, and clearly do not address (or do not clearly address :wink: ) the majority of the points posed by the author.

BTW: Clever attempt at displacing the assumption motive. It appears as though I hit close to home once again. As to the appropriateness of shaming others (as in you) - please note the :wink: after "What a shame".
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Are we spoiled?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/08/2024 at 07:07:16