So Is The USA The Greatest Country In THe World? If Not, Why Not?

[S.J.]

You mean your rhetorical question? If you're not defending the statements, does that mean you disagree with them?

No, I specifically asked you which one of those statements are "anti-American" and why?

Are you going to answer that? Yes or no?

Go back and read my posts, you lazy ****. You saying I haven't answered your stupid question doesn't mean I haven't. I'm not gonna keep indulging your ignorance.

 

[Billo_Really]

Go back and read my posts, you lazy ****. You saying I haven't answered your stupid question doesn't mean I haven't. I'm not gonna keep indulging your ignorance.

You just broad-stroked everything as "anti-American".

I posted his specific statements and asked which ones (specifically) were anti-American and why?

Now you're unwilling to explain your earlier drive-by shooting.

 

[candycorn]

Since S.J. looks like he's going to puss out, are there any other right-wingers who can say what is "anti-American" about the following statements?

Things stated in the OP video

1. "Do you know why people don't like liberals, it's because they lose!"

2. "Are you saying America is the only country who has freedom?"

3. "Canada has freedom; Japan, Germany the UK have freedom!"

4. "207 sovereign states in the world, 180 of them have freedom."

5. "We're 7th in literacy; 27th in math; 22nd in science; 49th in life expectancy; 178th in infant mortality; 3rd in median household income; No. 4 in labor force and No. 4 in exports."

6. "We lead the world in only 3 catagories; number of incarcerated citizens per capita; number of citizens who believe angels are real; and defense spending, where we spend more than the next 26 country's combined."

7. "So when you ask if we're the greatest country in the world, I don't know what the **** you are talking about?"

8. "We sure used to be. We stood up for what was right. We fought for moral reasons. We passed, struck down laws for moral reasons. We waged wars on poverty, not poor people. We sacrificed. We cared about our neighbors. We put our money where our mouths were and we never beat our chests. We built great big things, made un-Godly technological advances, explored the universe, we cured disease, we cultivated the worlds greatest artists and the worlds greatest economy."

9. "We aspired to intelligence, we didn't belittle it, it didn't make us feel inferior."

10. "We didn't identify ourselves by who we voted for in the last election."

11. "We didn't scare so easy."

12. "We were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed by great men who were revered."

13. "The first step in solving a problem is recognizing there is one."[/CONT]

Notice the 'we' that Sorkin kept throwing at you?

America was much better when people noticed it, embraced it, and taught our kids about who 'we' were. Now in your hands and many on the right, 'we' means the people who think like me.

 

[Billo_Really]

Notice the 'we' that Sorkin kept throwing at you?

America was much better when people noticed it, embraced it, and taught our kids about who 'we' were. Now in your hands and many on the right, 'we' means the people who think like me.

I don't consider "we", people who think like me.

I'm not even looking for agreement. I think disagreement is a healthy part of democracy.

My issue is about those who are unable to explain why they disagree.

 

[Katzndogz]

If we used to be so great, what happened? What changed so we aren't so great anymore?

Liberals got too much influence. They need to be reduced to the status of a buzzing, annoying fly.

 

[candycorn]

Notice the 'we' that Sorkin kept throwing at you?

America was much better when people noticed it, embraced it, and taught our kids about who 'we' were. Now in your hands and many on the right, 'we' means the people who think like me.

I don't consider "we", people who think like me.

I'm not even looking for agreement. I think disagreement is a healthy part of democracy.

My issue is about those who are unable to explain why they disagree.

Yet you dont disagree with Sorkin? Very healthy.

Not sure people are disagreeing, moreover they are stating 'yeah and look what happened'...the first part of #8 for example. Nearly 50 yrs after the Great Society and we still have poverty. I wish Sorkin would have added in, 'we helped those in need and they were willing to help themselves' I think it may be time for some new tactics in the war on poverty...what say you?

As for #5, I always question the metrics used. We have the finest universities in the world (you can add that to #6). Its not due to more T1 lines or WiFi. We must be doing something right.

If anything, I think we suffer, as a culture, from what marketers call the magnetic middle. Why strive for exceptional when you can get money and fame (in some cases) by being a cut above? This ties into #12 I think. So who do you hold reverence toward?

 

[jasonnfree]

If we used to be so great, what happened? What changed so we aren't so great anymore?

Liberals got too much influence. They need to be reduced to the status of a buzzing, annoying fly.

FDR was certainly a liberal and the ww2 vets I knew had great respect for him as commander in chief. Most all old timers I've know from the depression/ww2 days had great faith in FDR and his brand of liberalism.

 

[candycorn]

If we used to be so great, what happened? What changed so we aren't so great anymore?

Liberals got too much influence. They need to be reduced to the status of a buzzing, annoying fly.

FDR was certainly a liberal and the ww2 vets I knew had great respect for him as commander in chief. Most all old timers I've know from the depression/ww2 days had great faith in FDR and his brand of liberalism.

Could you imagine getting social security through today's Congress? You think they hate Obamacare....

 

[Kondor3]

Name another country that people risk certain death just to be here.

Good point...

Although, in many instances, it may be more a matter of...

"I am going to risk death to get to the 'greatest' country within my practical reach, because I live in such a $hithole. I might have chosen someplace else if I had a wider range of practical choices and the luxury of more time, but I deal in what is practical."

Amongst our own people, I seriously doubt that anyone but the most vicious America-Haters would say that we are not still a Great Country, or even that we are not still strong contenders for the Greatest Country Overall, despite our present-day difficulties and slippages and sense of losing our direction...

But the kind of Self-Criticism that arises from the video that spawned this thread ALSO has an important part to play in the national conversation, lest we stagnate and go into decline, or accelerate our slide away from our former high standards of life and community.

 

[José]

Originally posted by rightwinger
Instead, we provide protection to Latin America from foreign intervention.

LOL...

The country responsible for more than 80 interventions in Latin America (from full-blown military invasions and occupations to the instigation of bloody civil wars in Nicaragua, El Salvador etc... that killed hundreds of thousands) being portrayed as the "protector of latin american sovereignty" immediatelly qualifies for the "Bullshit of the Millenium" award!!

By the way, America "protected" Mexico so well in the 19th century she even gobbled up half of the country so it could become "fully protected".

But I know I don't stand a chance in Hell to convince the "America always treated country X with love and compassion because she never nuked it" crowd.

Originally posted by rightwinger
They have stable governments because we insisted on it.

After instigating the overthrowing of democratically elected leaders and their replacement by bloody civilian and military dictatorships throughout Latin America in the 50's and 60's America really began pushing for redemocratization in the region from 1990 on. This is a fact and I give credit where credit is due.

Originally posted by rightwinger
If the US wanted to own Latin America, we could
If we wanted them as a colony, we could do so

I'll have to agree with you again (well, sort of).

Latin american countries WERE America's economic colonies for 150 years, selling bananas and buying computers (with both prices being dictated by the US, sometimes at the point of a gun).

But even if you take into consideration all the puppet governments installed by the US in LA to do its bidding, there's no doubt that, as a whole, the region was dealt a better hand by history than political AND economic colonies like India, Congo or Algeria that were DIRECTLY ruled by Britain, France with Mexico being perhaps the only exception as I said earlier.

From the point of view of mexican nationalism, the country would be counting its blessings today if it had "only" remained a US colony for 100 or so years instead of losing half of its land.

But if your point is:

"America has always had the power to treat Latin America 100 times worse than she did."

then you'll get no argument from me.

 

[José]

Well, other than that...what's there to ***** about?

LOL JW...

You see... I've never met any latin american in my life (and I should know since I'm one of them) who thought the US should be punished in any way for 150 years of american interference in their countries' internal affairs (planned and executed by the US GOVERNMENT not US citizens).

The hundreds of thousands of orphans that resulted from the US-backed civil wars may bear a deep resentment towards America but that's all.

But you can be sure as Hell I've seen dozens of US patriots gone wild here (see Frank up there) saying the US should wage war and occupy Mexico militarily due to something the country isn't even responsible for (illegal immigration, which results from the actions of individuals, not from a mexican government policy).

 

[Unkotare]

If we used to be so great, what happened? What changed so we aren't so great anymore?

Liberals got too much influence. They need to be reduced to the status of a buzzing, annoying fly.

FDR was certainly a liberal and the ww2 vets I knew had great respect for him as commander in chief. Most all old timers I've know from the depression/ww2 days had great faith in FDR and his brand of liberalism.

FDR was a scumbag and one of the greatest threats this nation has ever faced.

 

[Unkotare]

... something the country isn't even responsible for (illegal immigration, which results from the actions of individuals, not from a mexican government policy).

Not so fast, Jose...


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/09/weekinreview/09word.html?_r=0

 

[candycorn]

Name another country that people risk certain death just to be here.

Good point...

Although, in many instances, it may be more a matter of...

"I am going to risk death to get to the 'greatest' country within my practical reach, because I live in such a $hithole. I might have chosen someplace else if I had a wider range of practical choices and the luxury of more time, but I deal in what is practical."

Amongst our own people, I seriously doubt that anyone but the most vicious America-Haters would say that we are not still a Great Country, or even that we are not still strong contenders for the Greatest Country Overall, despite our present-day difficulties and slippages and sense of losing our direction...

But the kind of Self-Criticism that arises from the video that spawned this thread ALSO has an important part to play in the national conversation, lest we stagnate and go into decline, or accelerate our slide away from our former high standards of life and community.

Every other country on earth would trade places with the US and our "problems".

I don't deny our problems in this nation but when the problem is the ability to feed your people and choosing not to versus having no ability to feed your people and that not changing for the foreseeable future, we win.

 

[José]

... something the country isn't even responsible for (illegal immigration, which results from the actions of individuals, not from a mexican government policy).

Not so fast, Jose...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/09/weekinreview/09word.html?_r=0

LOL... the famous comic book that almost started a war...

The main purpose of the booklet was to save lives... it strongly urges people to enter the US legally, warning them about the mortal danger of crossing the desert and the less than savory characters who usually help them.

But you are right... the comic book DEFINITELY CROSSES THE LINE when it warns people to "keep a low profile", "avoid calling attention to yourself", "avoid loud parties", "avoid getting into fights"...

If I were Mexico's president I'd issue an official apology to the US government and demand the immediate destruction of all pamphlets not yet distributed.

But let's not blow the issue out of proportion here... it's not like Mexico is using the mass media to advertise illegal immigration or paying the bus fare from Chiapas to the border and lending illegals money so they can survive in the US... it's just a damn piece of paper.

 

[Kondor3]

Name another country that people risk certain death just to be here.

Good point...

Although, in many instances, it may be more a matter of...

"I am going to risk death to get to the 'greatest' country within my practical reach, because I live in such a $hithole. I might have chosen someplace else if I had a wider range of practical choices and the luxury of more time, but I deal in what is practical."

Amongst our own people, I seriously doubt that anyone but the most vicious America-Haters would say that we are not still a Great Country, or even that we are not still strong contenders for the Greatest Country Overall, despite our present-day difficulties and slippages and sense of losing our direction...

But the kind of Self-Criticism that arises from the video that spawned this thread ALSO has an important part to play in the national conversation, lest we stagnate and go into decline, or accelerate our slide away from our former high standards of life and community.

Every other country on earth would trade places with the US and our "problems".

I don't deny our problems in this nation but when the problem is the ability to feed your people and choosing not to versus having no ability to feed your people and that not changing for the foreseeable future, we win.

Even if what you say is true - and it's purely subjective opinion in both our cases - the speech is designed to serve as a shock - a wake-up call - a bucketful of cold water in the face - and it succeeds admirably in that respect - highlighting areas in which we have either fallen behind or which we have let slip from our grasp, due to selfishness and partisanship and bickering and mean-spiritedness - and any device that can accomplish such things gets high marks in my own personal book.

 

[Billo_Really]

Yet you dont disagree with Sorkin? Very healthy.

I haven't stated what I agree (or disagree) with yet.

Not sure people are disagreeing, moreover they are stating 'yeah and look what happened'...the first part of #8 for example. Nearly 50 yrs after the Great Society and we still have poverty. I wish Sorkin would have added in, 'we helped those in need and they were willing to help themselves' I think it may be time for some new tactics in the war on poverty...what say you?

Who's Sorkin?

As for #5, I always question the metrics used. We have the finest universities in the world (you can add that to #6). Its not due to more T1 lines or WiFi. We must be doing something right.

If anything, I think we suffer, as a culture, from what marketers call the magnetic middle. Why strive for exceptional when you can get money and fame (in some cases) by being a cut above? This ties into #12 I think. So who do you hold reverence toward?

That depends on the subject.

Right off the top of my head, John Trudell.

 

[candycorn]

Yet you dont disagree with Sorkin? Very healthy.

I haven't stated what I agree (or disagree) with yet.

Not sure people are disagreeing, moreover they are stating 'yeah and look what happened'...the first part of #8 for example. Nearly 50 yrs after the Great Society and we still have poverty. I wish Sorkin would have added in, 'we helped those in need and they were willing to help themselves' I think it may be time for some new tactics in the war on poverty...what say you?

Who's Sorkin?

As for #5, I always question the metrics used. We have the finest universities in the world (you can add that to #6). Its not due to more T1 lines or WiFi. We must be doing something right.

If anything, I think we suffer, as a culture, from what marketers call the magnetic middle. Why strive for exceptional when you can get money and fame (in some cases) by being a cut above? This ties into #12 I think. So who do you hold reverence toward?

That depends on the subject.

Right off the top of my head, John Trudell.

Aaron Sorkin wrote what Jeff Daniels said. Please let us know.

 

[candycorn]

Good point...

Although, in many instances, it may be more a matter of...

"I am going to risk death to get to the 'greatest' country within my practical reach, because I live in such a $hithole. I might have chosen someplace else if I had a wider range of practical choices and the luxury of more time, but I deal in what is practical."

Amongst our own people, I seriously doubt that anyone but the most vicious America-Haters would say that we are not still a Great Country, or even that we are not still strong contenders for the Greatest Country Overall, despite our present-day difficulties and slippages and sense of losing our direction...

But the kind of Self-Criticism that arises from the video that spawned this thread ALSO has an important part to play in the national conversation, lest we stagnate and go into decline, or accelerate our slide away from our former high standards of life and community.

Every other country on earth would trade places with the US and our "problems".

I don't deny our problems in this nation but when the problem is the ability to feed your people and choosing not to versus having no ability to feed your people and that not changing for the foreseeable future, we win.

Even if what you say is true - and it's purely subjective opinion in both our cases - the speech is designed to serve as a shock - a wake-up call - a bucketful of cold water in the face - and it succeeds admirably in that respect - highlighting areas in which we have either fallen behind or which we have let slip from our grasp, due to selfishness and partisanship and bickering and mean-spiritedness - and any device that can accomplish such things gets high marks in my own personal book.

I too have posted the video before....great speech. However hardly is it accurate on all counts. I think that grad students in the STEM and PS fields, scholars across the academic spectrum and members of Congress should watch it every day. Couldn't hurt.

My contention is with those who like the words but seem to forget their meanings.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sorkin helps Liberals think

It's that simple