The Things I Most Fear

..........destruction from within by people who hate this country?

Who? That's pretty vague. Who might that be?

The OP’s ‘fears’ are likely the consequence of his perception of events in Ferguson, Missouri.

But you knew that already.

Possibly, but if he cannot articulate them then they are (as you noted) simply a method of maintaining gloom and doom for a political advantage. It can be manipulated for whatever incident occurs by refusing to acknowledge an actual issue.
 
1. Destruction of the United States from within by people who hate this country and what it has stood for as a land of opportunity and freedom.

2. Destruction of the United States from within by people who understand #1 and decide to take control of our country by force.

Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.

I don't agree with the "destruction" of the US, but there is a transformation, a negative transformation. Think back to the 50's and 60's when people were basically innocent and unassuming.

Then we had civil rights and things were better for the people of color but it took a long road. The culmination of righting the wrongs could have been with electing the first black president.

But he didn't bring the people together as he promised, he drove them apart, further than they had been before. I blame the problems we have on him. Squarely on his shoulders.
 
People who hate this country believe that it was built primarily on the backs of forced labor (as opposed to individual effort) and has been the principal source of most of the world's problems since WW2, thereby warranting massive changes to our society and economy.
 
People who hate this country believe that it was built primarily on the backs of forced labor (as opposed to individual effort) and has been the principal source of most of the world's problems since WW2, thereby warranting massive changes to our society and economy.

You mean slavery? The right set of people aren't idolized?

This is an empire. It's good to be king, nay?
 
People who hate this country believe that it was built primarily on the backs of forced labor (as opposed to individual effort) and has been the principal source of most of the world's problems since WW2, thereby warranting massive changes to our society and economy.


Even if there are people with these beliefs, they are probably not in a position to destroy this country. And by the way, a good percentage of the country was built on forced labor and bringing immigrants here to keep wages very low. These two policies helped only the very wealthy, not the average working person. We still have this immigration policy to keep wages low even though the complaint is that there are not enough jobs.
 
Just like I said...

P.S. You meant EVIL empire, right?

I meant empire and just that. The reality is that this is an empire. It simply is. It's better to be on this side than living in a nation-state strongly influenced by the US, don't you think?

History is not exclusively owned by the captains of industry. It's equally shared with the people that did the work and the ones that fought and died in it's wars.
 
Hard to tell whether some of these comments are simple irrelevancies or designed to impart some message without having to defend it (e.g., "It's good to be king.") As to immigration canard, almost all immigrants arrive here on their own dime. The low wage/business connection is a deception invented to deflect attention away from those who support open borders.
 
Hard to tell whether some of these comments are simple irrelevancies or designed to impart some message without having to defend it (e.g., "It's good to be king.") As to immigration canard, almost all immigrants arrive here on their own dime. The low wage/business connection is a deception invented to deflect attention away from those who support open borders.
You understand perfectly what is being said. You are intentionally vague so that you don't have to defend your position. Noted.
 
I suppose that I should feel complemented by your copy cat response.
 
1. Destruction of the United States from within by people who hate this country and what it has stood for as a land of opportunity and freedom.

2. Destruction of the United States from within by people who understand #1 and decide to take control of our country by force.

Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.

I don't agree with the "destruction" of the US, but there is a transformation, a negative transformation. Think back to the 50's and 60's when people were basically innocent and unassuming.

Then we had civil rights and things were better for the people of color but it took a long road. The culmination of righting the wrongs could have been with electing the first black president.

But he didn't bring the people together as he promised, he drove them apart, further than they had been before. I blame the problems we have on him. Squarely on his shoulders
.

Please give specific examples of what the first black president did to drive people apart.
 
He reflexively takes the side of any black person involved in a dispute with a white person (e.g., the Harvard Professor, Trevon Martin, Michael Brown). Are those examples specific enough for you?
 
1. Destruction of the United States from within by people who hate this country and what it has stood for as a land of opportunity and freedom.

2. Destruction of the United States from within by people who understand #1 and decide to take control of our country by force.

Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.
You fear the same things as most of your fellow conservatives: change, diversity, and dissent.
 
1. Destruction of the United States from within by people who hate this country and what it has stood for as a land of opportunity and freedom.

2. Destruction of the United States from within by people who understand #1 and decide to take control of our country by force.

Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.
You fear the same things as most of your fellow conservatives: change, diversity, and dissent.

Brilliant analysis. Dissent was the highest form of patriotism when Bush was President; now it is the lowest form of racism...
 
He reflexively takes the side of any black person involved in a dispute with a white person (e.g., the Harvard Professor, Trevon Martin, Michael Brown). Are those examples specific enough for you?

That doesn't even come close to justifying "driving the people further apart".
 
He reflexively takes the side of any black person involved in a dispute with a white person (e.g., the Harvard Professor, Trevon Martin, Michael Brown). Are those examples specific enough for you?

That doesn't even come close to justifying "driving the people further apart".

OK, let me spell it out for you: He defined these events as racial issues, pitting black against white. Comprende?
 
He reflexively takes the side of any black person involved in a dispute with a white person (e.g., the Harvard Professor, Trevon Martin, Michael Brown). Are those examples specific enough for you?

That doesn't even come close to justifying "driving the people further apart".

OK, let me spell it out for you: He defined these events as racial issues, pitting black against white. Comprende?

Who knew you could read Obama's mind?
 

Forum List

Back
Top