Oh, come now, Polecat. We “liberals” get accused of having no sense of humor. Now what? Though the comic had all the subtely of a sledgehammer, it’s not a bad a satire and it does reflect (albeit in a very Swiftian exagerration) the tone that seems to be coming from the Boys in Charge. OK, I’m thousands of miles away, and I haven’t lived in America since the Clinton administration, but if you want to paint in broad strokes, this comic does reflect what I see, as an outsider, going on in America.
Oh yes, and there are such a variety of opinions there! So many different corners of the corporate world …
Now, now, to be fair, it’s really no surprise that a President surrounds himself with people who are like him… Who else is he going to trust? Do you really expect any politician to surround himself with people who violently disagree? I’m sure he knows something about the opposing positions, but I would expect that even if his Cabinet told them to him, he just wouldn’t care. Again, what President would? You’re the one who has to make the decision, and I’d expect that most Presidents are pretty firm when their minds are made up.
That said, I really can’t believe that Reagan singlehandedly won the decades-old Cold War with a few relatively empty words, nor the rather perplexing assertion that liberalism is Communism (if it were, I don’t think even Republicans could keep certain states, or the entire country, from looking like Russia or China or Cuba, countries that might fit some people’s definition of conservative in many ways). But still, while we could fault Bush for not looking further for certain solutions, I don’t think we can blame him for not thinking that a Cabinet is there to be a SDMB-like debate forum…
No, just my intelligence. Your “opinion” makes other people “un-American,” though…
One has to notice, though, that nobody called those who opposed Clinton and tried to remove him from his elected office “un-American.”
“Hypocritical sonofabitch bastards”, yeah, but not un-American…
Well, I never expect to be elected to high office (in my opinion, anybody who actually wants to be President is almost certainly a crackpot by definition), but if I were ever saddled with the job, the first thing I’d do would be to form an advisory group assembled from the broad spectrum of SDMBers, left and right. I would make a point of listening most carefully to those people who disagreed with me. But then, that’s why I wouldn’t make a good politician: I’m too reasonable. :rolleyes:
I have not seen the term “Unamerican” used much or at all. Use of this word in the OP is a red herring.
I have often seen the terms “unpatriotic” and “Anti-American” These are accurate descriptions of some people – that is, people who tend to assume that America is in the wrong and who go out of their way to criticize America.
Those who leap to criticize America are generally not unselfishly enlisting into military service; in fact their comments tend to discrouage others from doing so. They are unpatriotic, by definition.
Some critics seek to find America to be wrong. They are accurately described as anti-American.
To love America is to criticize it. That is the delicious irony of living in an open democracy. Unfortunately, far too many people do not get that.
No, it isn’t… you haven’t been watching. “Un-American” has ben used many times, expecially in the first weeks after 9/11. Look it up in any search engine, see what you get.
So, the only way to patriotically “serve one’s country” is through the military? That’s a pretty narrow definition, december. Rescue workers and firefighters aren’t serving their country? Laborers aren’t serving their country? Politicians aren’t serving their country?
You might want to re-think that one a bit, or at least re-state it. There are many ways to serve America. The military is only one.
Please clear this statement up… a person is anti-American if they seek to find America in the wrong, or just if they find America in the wrong, whatever they were seeking? I think I know a patriot who would disagree with that idea…
Unless you think Abraham Lincoln isn’t unpatriotic too, of course. 
I agree with KellyM… protest and criticism lies at the heart of what makes America great. To show our love for our country, we must constantly question it, constantly be willing to stand up and criticize it if we feel it is in the wrong.
Criticizing America is not anti-American. In fact, it is one of the most profoundly pro-American acts I can think of.
Sitting back, allowing leadership to rule unchecked, permitting acts and actions that we disapprove of, following obediently along with whatever the gub’mint tells us to do… that is anti-American. That is Anti-America.
december: *I have often seen the terms “unpatriotic” and “Anti-American” These are accurate descriptions of some people – that is, people who tend to assume that America is in the wrong and who go out of their way to criticize America. […]
Those who leap to criticize America are generally not unselfishly enlisting into military service; [? Typo? Your quoted definition of patriotism doesn’t mention “military service,” it just says “service to one’s country”] in fact their comments tend to discrouage others from doing so. They are unpatriotic, by definition.
Some critics seek to find America to be wrong. They are accurately described as anti-American.*
Emphasis mine. You know, december, I can’t help noticing that all these “tendencies” that you feel are accurately described as “unpatriotic” and “anti-American” are extremely nebulous and subjective. How do you tell the difference between someone who “tends to assume that America is in the wrong” and someone who simply thinks that America is in the wrong? Between someone who criticizes America and someone who “leaps” or “goes out of their way” to criticize America? Between someone who thinks America is wrong and someone who “seeks” to find America to be wrong?
It’s all a vague subjective judgement of underlying motives, and it looks like just a convenient excuse to smear as “unpatriotic” or “anti-American” any criticism that you don’t happen to like.
I haven’t had this much fun reading a political thread since,… well ever. Lot’s of laughs guys thanks.
What taggert is pulling off is really hilarious whether he means it or not.
I don’t like the term “Un-American” I don’t think it’s possible in a country founded by immigrants with freedom of the press and religion.
“Anti-American” is much better, although if you look at the views of these people, you might find that they’re really anti-corporate or anti-US government. Small difference to some but a big one for me.
As for un-patriotic, I’ll admit to that one fair and square because “country” to me means government. And I’m very dissapointed by my government’s decisions which seem to happen almost to spite my voting patterns. I love the people of the US about as much as I love the people anywhere else in the world. I don’t think Americans are somehow better than everybody else because of their culture and history.
But, there are some who tend to think the worst about America, who criticize America inaccurately or in unbalanced fashion. Such conduct does not demonstrate love of America.
The definition of patriotic includes the word “unselfish.” The most unselfish way to serve America is to join the military and risk one’s life in America’s defense.
BTW the unpatriotic Amercans I’m thinking of tend not to be firemen and policemen!
One must make judgments. One could ask the same rhetorical question about any sort of haters. E.g., there are people who appear to be racists, at least nebulously. OTOH there have been far too many others who have been clear-cut racists.
Unfortunately there are indeed people (some of whom are Americans) who go out of their way to criticize America. E.g., those at Amnesty Interntional and the International Red Cross who criticized conditions at Gitmo before they had done their visit and actually checked (and discovered that their criticisms were wrong.)
I understand your assertion. Please provide your evidence.
The fact that the definition contains the word “unselfish” (and since when did we start arguing principles out of the dictionary?) does not mean that it contains the phrase “most unselfish” or limits itself to that modifier.
Do you have a citation for statistics on the opinions of military service people, firefolk, and policefolk? Or are you just talking off the top of your head? I realize that there are conservative people in the organizations you mention (though I don’t know what how one would tell if it were a majority or not). There are also liberals in these organizations that I’ve met who may be labelled unpatriotic. So, there’s my anecdotal evidence to your off-the-cuff generalizations.
Provide evidence and practice what you preach, december. Why is military service the most unselfish way to serve? What about someone who joins the peace corps and risks their life in America’s defense? Or do you think the only way one can defend America is through actualized or threatened violence? In my opinion, you have made an unwarranted superlative declaration.
I will now attempt to put words into your mouth. From what I understand of people who hold your position, you think that being in the military and risking one’s life in America’s defense is the most unselfish act for two reasons… one because the soldiers are risking their lives. But since there are others who do as such (as you alluded to with your nod to police and firefighters… not to mention medical workers, EMTs, civil servants, public defenders, diplomats, humanitarians, etc.) I’ve heard it said, two because they are trying to kill or violently change those who would work against America’s defense.
I disagree that criteria number two makes one necessarily the most unselfish.
Perhaps you can offer some clarification?
december,
I fear that it is the kind of thinking like yours regarding partiotism and being American that allows comments I make against an American Govt. policy to be construed immediately (without basis) as anti-American or American-hating. It is one thing to debate the correctness and ramifications of an issue such as the Gitmo detainess and another to brand the other voice as anti-American. Granted, there might be those who criticize US at every single chance available and overlook its positives, but there are people who praise and side with the US blindly too. We should never forget that. Name-calling never helps, especially in a debate as it only leads to reinforcing your position more on a psychological basis, enforces biases, and increases polarization. For the record, do you think anyone who finds the detainee position in Cuba controversial or wrong hates America?
Cliche Alert: “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel” - Samuel Johnson
Patriotism, like faith, is ‘believing in’ something without evidence to support that belief. What I mean is Patriotism is a blind hysteria, an infectious doctrine, a tool used to whip up ‘faith’ in authoritive institutions and increase a populations willingness to obey those institutions. That’s why during times of war patriotic propoganda is so important in keeping workers loyal to a war effort.
You know why.
This is a subject that you probably should avoid.
But since you brought it up, how does your definition above square with George aWol Bush’s slanders regarding John McCain’s unfitness for the Presidency because the horrors of his captivity and torture in Hanoi had made him too unstable to be President?
JDM
Because John McCain, who is unbalanced from his captivity, isn’t the government? President Bush is the official Head of State. Criticizing him in time of war is unpatriotic.
december: I understand your assertion. Please provide your evidence.
?? Evidence of what? What factual assertion did I make that you’re challenging?
Kimstu – when some of us call people like Michael Moore 'Anti-American" or “unpatriotic”, what is our motivation?
- The words are accurate.
- We’re trying to smear him
I believe the words are accurate. However, it is nevertheless conceivable that a smear is intended, as you alleged. I invite you to provide evidence that smearing was the motivation.
JDM – I think that it was despicable to conduct an unjustified smear campaign implying that McCain was unstable.
JS Princeton – I conisider certain individuals to have demonstrated anti-Americanism. None of these people are members of the armed forces, policemen or firemen.
Traditionally military service (during a time of war) has been poorly paid, very uncomfortable, risked death or injury, and interfered with one’s career and one’s relationship with family and friends. One practical advantage of patriotism is to convince a large number of people to make such a sacrifice – acting for the good of the whole country, at the expense of their personal good.
litost – I agree that there is sometimes a fine line between reasonable criticism and anti-Americanism. Joseph McCarthy hurt society by abusing that confusion for his own political ends.
Since the Gitmo detainees are being treated better than any other prisoners in history, and far better than they had been by their own government, I would consider criticism of Gitmos conditions to be based on anti-Americanism (or perhaps ignorance.) No doubt many individuals who criticize Gitmo conditions have been misled by anti-American sources.
Halo – I agree that patriotism need not be based on reality. Even so, it can be vital for the preservation of the country. If people will not fight for their country, it’s apt to be overwhelmed by outsiders.
However, in this case, it seems to me that American and Western culture are indeed factually superior to the values of al Qaida.