[hijack]
Dunno which book you are trying to recall, but for this topic, I definitely cannot stop recommending The Betrayal of America: How the Supreme Court Undermined the Constitution and Chose Our President, by Vincent Bugliosi. His writing is easy to follow, backed up by scads of references, and makes it explicitly clear how the USSC decision in Bush v. Gore was a trumped-up excuse to stop the manual recounts in Florida and put Bush into office.
[/hijack]
Dn’t forget that the cockamamie FL SC recount scheme was overturned 7 to 2. If the USSC had allowed the FL SC another shot, they would have again failed to pass muster IMHO.
The FL SC was explictly thumbing their nose at the US SC – not a good idea. Furthermore, they were out of time. The next recount scheme by the FL SC would have taken several days or weeks to design. Then there would have been a stay so that the US SC could consider it. Even if it were approved by the US SC (very, very unlikely) they’d have to spend days actually actually doing the recount, followed by more endless appeals at the state and federal level. We’d have been without a President today! (Maybe that would be good ;))
IMHO 5 members of the US SC did a great service to the country by allowing the new president to take office in a timely manner.
sorry for the hijack…
Well, Bugliosi managed to convice Charles Manson, though I’m not sure that would be all that tough. What else has he done?
Anyhoo, Bugliosi and Dershowitz slant way to the left, so I’m not surprised they are upset about Bush winning. Dershie was pretty much apoplectic the whole time during the “hand” recounts, that was grand, at least.
Actually, I believe Dershowitz points out that the USSC essentially set a legal trap for the Florida SC, which they fell into. I’d cough up the details, but (a) I’m at work, and (b) my copy of Supreme Injustice is still packed up in a box at home.
I never bought that argument – we had prior precedent of a state not submitting its final electoral college results until days before January 20th (Hawaii, in the early 70s, wasn’t it?). Florida could’ve done the same thing [SUB]at least until the Florida legislature decide to take matters into their own hands and give the states’ electoral votes to Bush anyway…[/SUB]
Dershowitz readily admits that he’s a left-leaning Gore supporter, but Bugliosi doesn’t strike me as in the same camp – the guy cites Barry Goldwater as a political role model, even.
In any event, IANAL, but their respective books seem to offer substantial references to prior precedent and the respective legislation to make their arguments, so I don’t think one can dismiss them as biased kooks so simply.
Geeeeez, Louise!!!
Enough with the election drivel already - go start a different thread.
The election was nearly a year ago. It is OVER. Get on with your lives.
[NUTSHELL]
You citizens who will have the opportunity to vote in the next election can either:
(a) vent your frustrations by voting for someone you think can do a better job, or
(b) assume anyone we elect will be just as bad if not worse and try to keep ol’ George W. in the White House.
[/NUTSHELL]
If people are capable of making an informed decision, I suggest the time to do so is in the voting booth, not by engaging in pointless whining after the fact. I was not at all pleased with the choices offered in the election, but I voted for the candidate who I thought was best qualified and nearer my beliefs - whether that was Bush, Gore, or someone else is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. If you’re an American citizen eligible to vote in that election and YOU DIDN’T, you have NO REASON to have ANY opinion about the winner or loser.
So: ** Hey Everyone-- Let’s Bash the US!!! {/b]
Wasn’t the first western democracy the Netherlands?
YOU were the persecuted, the pilgrims, etc…? Or do you mean your ancestors were? Or perhaps the ancestors of a tiny minority of the citizens of your country?
But if you want to go that way…Who slaughtered the amerindians? Who maintened slavery 50 years after it has been abolished in Europe? Who maintened racial segration until the second part of the 20th century? Why didn’t you mention this heritage too? Perhaps because you have to convince yourself that the american must be morally superior?
Written that way, we can equally say that that the soviet union saved the ass of western europe with its heroic soldiers and superior military ability. Except if you said that only because in your mind the US must have saved the world.
Could you refer us to some battle between the mongols and the americans as an evidence of this statement? And if it’s related to advance in strategy and techniques, couldn’t we say the same about…the nigerian soldiers, for instance? But perhaps it’s only related to some concept of you that the US must be better than everybody everywhere and at any time.
Yes, I can give you in return a list of european inventions :
accumulator, acetylen, discovery of ADN, glider, dirigible, liquid air, matches, production of aluminium, anesthesia, antibiotics, aspirin, motorcar, bakelit, magnetic band, tuberculosis vaccine, gas-lighters, electric toothbrush, rubber, memory card, chip card, tapes, carburettor, cellophane, photocells, motion picture projector, DDT, diode, dynamit, dynamo, electrocardiograph,…
Some figures or evidences proving this? Or did you just assume that american inventions must have saved more life…etc…
If so, why are you trying so hard to prove that your country is the best in everything instead of ignoring the bashings?
Concerning the technology and medecines, I already answered on this post. Concerning the aid, please refer to my post on the “UN debt” thread, with figures (from the CIA) showing that the US are actually the western country giving the less aid.
And you never aknowledge other countries for nothing, as demonstrated in your post. Nor do you aknowledge negative things about the US…
Of course, when the US do some dirty job, they always aknowledge it immediatly, never conceal or hide anything, and their officials always say the truth. Are you misleading, joking, or dreaming?
And if you mean that on the overall, the US tends to be quite open about their mistake and achievements, why do you “think it is safe to say…etc…”? Because you made an extended study of other countries policy, or just because you assume it is so?
Everyone can look at the mistakes and achievements of other western countries (to the same extent than the US) too. But perhaps you’re not inclined to look that way…
Usurper, what you just did in your post is waving your flag, nothing else. You’re absolutely convinced that your country is the best in every possible way, though it’s a mere assumption or article of faith from your part (I mean not based on facts, on your actual knowledge of other nations, on comparisons, etc…).
Since you said your country is very open and it’s easy to look at its mistakes and achievements, perhaps you should look a little at the mistakes department(and also at the achievments of other countries).
Perhaps you’ll then be able to understand a little better why your country is not always praised as you think she deserves be. Also you’ll have a little more balanced view, and you’ll avoid to display the kind of “clueless arrogance” which very often generates the american bashing you’re complaining about.
Are there provisions in the US constitution in the case a president wouldn’t be elected on time? (or couldn’t be)
Yep, and I’ll say it again: “The U.S. gets bashed because Americans are, in general, arrogant bastards…”
Dave Stewart: I have no idea how to classify the Hong Kong press in this, but I’m sure you’re right about it having freedoms that most of the Chinese press does not. I’m also a bit leary of an English-language newspaper–is such a thing likely to really reflect the reality of the mainstream press?–but I’m not sure where that leaves us.
Hmm…are you saying they shouldn’t? I mean, should any country be expected to listen to outsiders more than any other?
However, my original point way back on page one was simply that criticising the US will actually get attention withinthe US, and that it is therefore more fun and profitable than criticising somebody who won’t care or debate whether what you say is true or not.
Not that this really belongs in this thread, but…
Mobius74 said:
Across the Atlantic, into the teeth of th U-Boats, and without the most of the Royal Navy once Britain fell? (I’ll assume some of the RN would decline to surrender and head for Canadian and US ports.) While fighting the Japanese at the same time? Be a damn tough row to hoe…and I doubt we would have even tried. In other words, if you postulate the Brits actually losing, it’s logical to further postulate no major US involvement in Europe.
I have to disagree. I believe Germany’s defeat was inevitable once Hitler stupidly attacked the Soviet Union at the same time he failed to knock Britain out. Even if you assume the Germans could have eventually starved the Brits out–which is highly debatable, since the German Navy was nowhere near able to stand up to the Royal Navy–I think the Russians would have ended up throwing them at least back into Germany anyway. It would have taken longer, and probably gotten more people killed…but neither the Nazis nor the Communists were ever shy about expending lives.
Obviously US involvment shortened the process considerably…and I think it’s very possible that we kept Western Europe from ultimately being dominated by the Sovietsbecause of it…but I don’t believe that we were an absolute requirement for the end of the Nazis.
We now return to regularly scheduled programming.
Yes, but (at least here) people still bash the US, even when there’s no american around for the fun. Also, a journalist writing an article criticizing the US write mainly for his readers. Not in the hope that some american colleague will read and report his paper.
Of course, it’s much more tempting to bash (or release your steam) on an american board. Especially when one of the said americans just posted some narrow-minded “We’re the best” post. But american bashing isn’t only intended to infuriates americans.
I agree completely; I can’t understand why people are unwilling to acknowledge the negative things about their nation. That is the first step towards improvement.
While Usurper may seem like a total lunatic, there are people like him in every country. Although I think that Americans are on average more ignorant about the rest of the world than other nationalities, I have not found there to be more raving patriots in America than in any other country in which I have had the privilege to live. Also America is the only developed nation in which I have met people who not only hate their homeland but actually masquerade as people of a different nationality (in this case, usually Canadian) in order to participate in a bit of bashing themselves.
The European bashing of America is understandable in some cases because America does differ from Europe on several major issues. America is more conservative and more ignorant and thus easier to ridicule. And arrogant Americans inspire further mockery, but so do the arrogant of every nation, those who claim that the stereotypes are totally unjustified, those who claim that their countrymen have no flaws. The reason for America(n) bashing is simple: the U.S.A. is the dominant world power and this is resented by other nations. Americans themselves are guilty of this resentment towards the U.S.S.R. “Bashing” another entity is a way to make oneself feel superior, and it’s pretty harmless. I find it a bit ridiculous that Europeans spend so much time discussing the death sentence in a country so far away, rather than discussing national issues, but in a way I think that Americans should just feel flattered.
Okay - I’ll agree with “on average” here
And you obviously have not met me. I’m a patriot, though I don’t consider myself a “raving patriot”. After speaking to a number of people from England, Canada, and Australia, I find that there a good proportion of them that fit easily into the “fiercly loyal” category (and justly so). I don’t feel I have to masquerade as Canadian or Israeli or Martian to criticise the U.S. - after all, anyone who has half a brain and more compassion than a house plant can see what is awry. The trick is finding an American who is (a) willing to admit things are out of whack AND (b) has enough faith that things will be set right. So its alright to start with a stereotype as a model, but don’t expect all us Yankees to fit the mold. Actually, if you find yourself unwilling to let loose of your stereotype, understanding Americans is going to be more complicated than herding cats.
Okay - “ignorant” I’ll let go, but I’d like to add that this is an ignorance bred from arrogance or apathy, not from a lack of intelligence or education.
Well, I said it earlier in this very thread, but guess you missed it: “Rome fell - not to outside conquerors, but from its own excesses and corruption. Since history seems to repeat itself, I expect someday that the U.S. will also be a victim of its own flaws.”
The big problem with the USSR was the complete inability of our leaders and theirs to come to any equal and lasting agreements on anything (not to mention several “minor” incidents like the Cuban Missile Crisis). Well, no more USSR, no more USSR problem. Since the USSR no longer exists, I don’t see much point in “bashing”, unless it involves Cleveland. However, I understand that bashing Cleveland is acceptable behavior anywhere. Anyway, thanks for the additional perspective.
Um, isn’t this what I just said??
I don’ really understand this. What stereotype are you accusing me of holding too closely? I do tend to propagate certain stereotypes regarding Americans, but none of them are relevant to this discussion. As I was trying to defend Americans in my post I can’t see what would have offended you. Unless my ten days on this message board have rendered me so caustic and/or inarticulate that even gestures of support are mistaken for enemy fire.
Of course ignorance has nothing to do with intelligence, but I feel that an education with a more global perspective would effectively combat ignorance. I met several ignorant Americans who were not arrogant at all; on the contrary, they were very interested in learning about my background. I suppose that apathy could have been a factor, but since they were at an Ivy League university they probably hadn’t been dozing through their high school years.
Could you explain this to me as well, please? What does your comment have to do with anything in my post?
Yes, sorry, I should have made it clear that I was referring to the past.
clairobscur: I never said it was the onlyfactor, just one of them.
Um, yeah. Excuse me for agreeing with you.
Sorry, not “you” in particular, but “you” in a more general sense, as in “any member of the human race who is not an American”. BTW, I’m pretty damned difficult to offend, and ten days on this board could render one so, but (in your case) has not.
Good point, but I don’t harbor any delusion* that education comes exclusivly from colleges & universities. Experience is a much more reliable teacher, though it tends to be a tad rougher in its delivery and takes somewhat more time.
My apologies for any confusion, but you were the one who brought up admission of flaws.
Great! Means former Soviets can be our friends and we can bash Cleveland now!!!
Sorry, I don’t have an internet connection at home or I would have seen this sooner.
Let’s see…
You say that in your opinion it is a “twist of fate” that the continent that contains the United States is called “America”. Not to be too hard on you, but that’s baloney. The continent was referred to as “America” long before the pilgrims showed up. So it’s more a “twist of fate” that we started identifying ourselves as American.
And I won’t even comment on your statement about how the Western Hemisphere is called America.
That said, in my earlier post I noted that there isn’t a better term available to refer to citizens of the United States. United Staters? Doesn’t sound right. Although the usage is inherently flawed, I concede that referring to ourselves as Americans is the easiest way to identify ourselves.
However, my nitpick with your statements was that you seem to believe that the country is called (or should only be referred to as) America. That is inaccurate. The country is called the United States of America. When you are abroad and someone asks you where you are from, they’ll understand if you say “America”-- they won’t assume you are Canadian or Mexican. But for accuracy’s sake, you are from the United States.
I was simply trying to point out that calling the US America is inaccurate (and doesn’t take into account the other geopolitical entities on the continent). It’s the sort of arrogance-- “I come from the most important country on the American continent so I can call my country by the name of said continent and everyone will know what I am talking about” that makes Americans so unattractive to the rest of the world.
Your turn! 
Mobius74: I’m sorry, it seemed to me that you were attacking me and I couldn’t understand why. I still don’t really understand why I “must have missed” your comment about the flaws of Rome since all I was saying was that there are people in all countries who refuse to admit their national problems. But never mind about that. One last thing, though - when you said that when Americans are ignorant it is not because of lack of education, did you mean experience as part of this education? I feel that if Americans were educated with a more global perspective and if they had more experience travelling and so forth they would certainly be less ignorant. I would be more inclined to blame their education or experience than their arrogance or apathy, as I haven’t found Americans to be particularly arrogant or apathetic. There are some who are like that, but no more than in any other country.
My father was telling me the other day that he had read somewhere that 90% of Americans do not have a passport. But then he added that if he were American he probably wouldn’t feel the need for international travel either, when there are so many different holiday destinations within America alone. I imagine that if I lived in a country which included New York, California, Texas, Maine, Florida etc. I might not be inclined to pay stiff prices and endure nine-hour flights to cross the oceans.
And this to maryliza: is it really necessary to harp on the country’s name? Isn’t “America” just an abbreviation of “the United States of America” and not “North America”?
I mean that experience may actually be the most valuable part of ANY education; unfortunately the time and cost involved is sometimes prohibitive, thus the only viable alternative is often a college education. The way I see things, the only thing a college or university is capable of is preparing a person for his REAL education.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that statistic was true, and he seems to have hit on a major factor affecting American choices of holiday destination (read as “vacation destination” if you’re an American). In addition to the U.S. destinations, we are also able to cross into Canada without a passport for short visits. I’m not certain if this kind of agreement is also in effect with Mexico, but maybe one of my southern countrymen can provide some insight there. In any case, if only combining the U.S. & Canada, that’s a whole lot of places to see and (I’m sure you’ll agree) not nearly enough time off work to do it in. If it wasn’t for the cost of those nine-hour flights I wouldn’t mind visiting Europe and Australia. But, alas, my bank account will not support my dreams of overseas travel. Maybe someday…
I suspect its because the Christian European countries, the US, Canada and Australasia all belong to the West The West is a civilisation, and it treats its participants as member of a family. The US has the death penalty and other unique attributes which make the rest of the left wing family think that the US is the rogue conservative cousin. The analogy isn’t perfect, but that’s the impression I get.
Myster Ecks - sorry the China Daily has been concerned with domestic issues like the Beijing Olympics. I note the Economist has reported that China acknowledges it has an AIDS epidemic, but this makes no reference to Western criticism.
Sorry, I’m not trying to harp. I was merely pointing out that it is inaccurate to insist that the name of the country is America. Because it isn’t. America may be an abbreviation of USA, but that doesn’t make it accurate. And erislover made some comments that I found, for lack of a better word, unenlightened-- for example, her assertion that it is a “twist of fate” that the continent is called America. I don’t care what anyone calls the country. Call it Bob if you want to. If you do, though, you should understand that it is incorrect. It is important to be sensitive to the meanings and associations of words and phrases, so a blatant disregard for the fact that the country “America” doesn’t exist disturbs me. And if you read my first post to this thread, you’ll understand that this whole debate started as an aside to erislover.