International
Message Board
Welcome,
Guest
Log In
Search This Board:
Advanced Search
You are here:
News Index
>
International
>
Middle East Crisis
>
The UN hate speech's where is democrat outrage?
Discussions
1
2
3
4
5
6
Keep Reading
Topic:
The UN hate speech's where is democrat outrage?
Print Discussion
Post New
From:
madgician_ha
To:
All
18 of 98
9/27/06
It's globilization at work. However, I think Chavez' big mouth has hurt Citgo this time.....Seven eleven is looking for a new brand. I think its a good move. Citgo people can get a new brand, they are not held hostage to this enemy of America!
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
19 of 98
10/4/06
Our president is much more of a cartoon character than the elected leaders of Venezuela and Iran, both of whom are much more respected and popular in the rest of the world than the cartoon character currently residing in the White House. It is getting very tiresome to try to explain Bush to people in other countries and to reassure them that most Americans are not only not like that, but that they actually are embarrassed by Bush and those Americans who actually support him.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
20 of 98
10/4/06
The trouble is that about half of America is not all that different than Bush.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
madgician_ha
To:
All
21 of 98
10/4/06
I would say that is untrue, and I would also say Mr Bush is not Your president. We love him, we can kick him around but any outsiders try and we will defend him! Thats the American way bub!
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
22 of 98
10/4/06
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
madgician_ha
To:
All
23 of 98
10/4/06
SO who made an announcement? You know I am telling the truth...........anti Bush anti American rhetoric when we are at war is wrong.............disagree.......no problem.....but alot of people are downright nasty, and unfairly. There is right and there is wrong.........you are wrong.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
24 of 98
10/5/06
you're still doing it Teddy Roosevelt made his remark during a real war - WWI I'm sorry you feel that Bush cannot be criticized and confuse criticism of Bush with "anti-Americanism" I believe that you are the one who is being "anti-American" by forgetting the very principles upon this great country was founded
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
25 of 98
10/5/06
That is not what is being said at all. Bush can be criticized but criticize him for what he actually did and do not embellish the facts with conspiracy theories. There is a right and wrong way to criticize people and many out there do not criticize Bush, the undermine what he is trying to do. Trying to undermine the government is what makes a person anti-american.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
southpower
To:
All
26 of 98
10/4/06
Americans are gonna defend the office ,even if the person holding it is imperfect, sorta like family. We get a new President every 4 to 8 years. Bring on the clowns!
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
27 of 98
10/4/06
that's not what Teddy Roosevelt was referring to America is a country set up in such a manner that we are not beholden to an "office" or a "person" and required to support whoever is in charge no matter what they do those who would try to prevent criticism of the "office" or the person holding it are, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, the reat traitors to everything America stands for under its Constititution and as Abe Lincoln so well put: a "government by the people and for the people" and not the other way around what strikes me as particularly odd is that the very same people who now say there should be no criticism of Bush spent 8 years trying to tear down the Clinton presidency
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
28 of 98
10/5/06
Actually that wasn't what Teddy Roosevelt preached. What people most often think Teddy said is this:
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president... is morally treasonable to the American public.
In actuality he said this:
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
"Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star", 149 May 7, 1918
He also said:
The pacifist is as surely a traitor to his country and to humanity as is the most brutal wrongdoer.
There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100 percent. Americanism, only for those who are Americans and nothing else.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as he loves his own wife.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
29 of 98
10/8/06
America was set up to where we were not beholding to any other country or organization such as the Church or UN. We set up the country itself to give power to the states and the intent was to have a weak central government, however to be a state of the United States of America we had to agree to live by the laws set by the federal government. Our founding fathers did not want a government taht gave any one man too much authority or control, however the Articles of Confederation taught our founding father that we needed a strong central goveemnent instead of the week one they originally envisioned. Their end result was a government which allowed for the separation of powers by providing 3 branches of government and gave us a system of checks and balances to insure that the separation of powers stayed intact. Each branch had it's own separate powers. The Legislative Branch was made up of Congress and government offices that provided support and assistance to Congress - such as the GPO and the Lbrary of Congress. The Constitution gave Congress the power to make the law controlling trade, approves the making of money, makes laws controlling taxes and to declare war. The executive branch of Government insures the laws of the US are obeyed. The President of the United States is the head of the executive branch of government and those under this branch includes, but not necessarily is limited to: The President, The Vice-President, The Departments and independent agencies. The Judicial branch is made up of the court system with the SCOTUS being the highest court in the land. The courts decide arguments about the meaning of laws, how they are applied, and whether they break the rules of the Constitution. So what we have it Congress making the laws, The Prsident enforcing the law and SCOTUS and it's lower courts saying what the laws mean. There is nothing said in the early doucments concerning our not being "beholden" to any part of our government, in fact we, the people, are suppose to support our government and those in the various offices until such a time that the person is proven in a court of law to have acted outside of the framework of the constitution. The Constitution of the United States of America is our supreme focal point for our allegience, but that does not mean that we should not support our President and members of Congress, whether we like them or not. Where our support stops is when they break the law.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
30 of 98
10/4/06
that's not what Teddy Roosevelt was referring to America is a country set up in such a manner that we are not beholden to an "office" or a "person" and required to support whoever is in charge no matter what they do those who would try to prevent criticism of the "office" or the person holding it are, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, the reat traitors to everything America stands for under its Constititution and as Abe Lincoln so well put: a "government by the people and for the people" and not the other way around what strikes me as particularly odd is that the very same people who now say there should be no criticism of Bush spent 8 years trying to tear down the Clinton presidency
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
madgician_ha
To:
All
31 of 98
10/5/06
The pacifist is as surely a traitor to his country and to humanity as is the most brutal wrongdoer. There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100 percent. Americanism, only for those who are Americans and nothing else. The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life. Great quote! Does that apply today or what....outstanding Outlooker!!! The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as he loves his own wife.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
32 of 98
10/5/06
People only see what they wish to see. Teddy was not talking of supporting your country or president, he was talking about blindly supporting,
or criticizing
, your country or President. It seems the person trying to use Teddy's words is guilty of blindly criticizing the President.. which Teddy would deem as "UnAmerican". Teddy was pro-America and never once preached anything intended to undermine America. That is the bane of the spinsters and ill-informed, they take things out of context and spin it to their ideals.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
33 of 98
10/5/06
Bush is undermining America and criticizing him is very "American" he has increased hatred and hostility towards the USA around the world and has made US citizens much less safe as a result there are many "patriots" who are criticizing the Iraq War, including decorated combat vets
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
34 of 98
10/5/06
Once again.. Wrong. Bush is the President and he is watched by all parties. Remember not all republicans like the guy either. With as much talk of Bush violating the constitution or lying if there were anything substantial to the claims then he'd be under investigation or up on charges. Like him or not Bush plays with-in the rules. His admin may push the limits but he still stay with-in the framework of the constitution. He can't undermine America by sticking to the law as written. Uh, I got news for you Sunshine, Foreign Countries hated us since before Reagan. lol Bush didn't cause it nor did he really increase it. They are just more vocal now because it's the thing to do. It's like hearing about Airplane crashes around the Christmas holidays, the number of accidents really do not go up significantly, you just hear about them more. I've been overseas and the only thing most countries loved about America was the money. We were always deemed Ignorant Americans, hence the joke of I am an Ignorant American, which those in the military had translated into every language on the face of the planet by 1981. The so-called Patriots criticizing Iraq are a moot point. The reason is there were Vets speaking out against every war we had in the past 100 years, and that number rose after Vietnam. On the other hand there are many more who support Iraq. As I said, Moot Point.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
35 of 98
10/8/06
apparently ABC/Disney agrees with you since they deleted my last response go team! no wonder ABC/Disney has forfeited its reputation as a serious news source and is now simply FoxNews-lite a propaganda arm of the Busheviks
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Outlooker
To:
All
36 of 98
10/8/06
LOL You are so funny. The first thing is that just about everyone who has been on these ABC Boards knows that ABC is hardly a group of Pro-Bush people. In fact they allow more trashings of Bush on their boards than anyone else. What they do not allow is violations of their TOS and when they find them they delete them. I don't always agree with their judgments of what violates the TOS to both degrees. People, including me, posting things on these boards that I would never allow on my boards for they are just plain, unadulterated trashings of a person and have very little to do with a valid point. On the other hand they deleted things which I would have let slide becuase what the person said was valid enough and not said out hatred or spite. Those things were said becuase of a misunderstanding and lack of knowledge on a subject.. and I do not support punishing people simply because they made a comment that was derived from the simple fact that the person simply didn't know the facts and found it hard to believe what someone else said as being true. So, in my opinon, ABC makes mistakes sometimes, but they usually have a point when they delete. If they delete due to propaganda then it's usually towards the liberal mindset more than the conservative.
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
From:
Sarfatti
To:
All
37 of 98
10/8/06
In fact they allow more trashings of Bush on their boards than anyone else. --------------------- which trashings of Bush don't they allow? do other websites really censor posts that are critical of Bush? amazing! is this the USA or East Germany before the Wall came down?
Reply
Print
Email
Report as Violation
©
Mzinga, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
View Modes
Basic
Discussion Actions
Post a message
Mark read
Adjust text size
8 point
9 point
10 point
11 point
12 point
14 point
16 point
18 point
24 point
36 point
Message & Poster Actions
Report Violation
E-Mail this Message
Print Message
Add to Friends
Ignore this Author
Remove from Friends List
Stop Ignoring this Author
Rate this message
Discussion Tools
Post a message
Print Discussion
Interest level
High
Neutral
Ignore
Find messages
Advanced Search
View Modes
Basic
My Stuff by section
My Chats
My Forums
My Subscriptions
My Friends
My Preferences
Management Tools