Land Of The Free?

YES! Thanks, you put it very well. :slight_smile:

I did a quickie search for information, but not a thorough one. So tell me how often they do say it? I do know they are not ‘required’ to because the requirement was declared unconstitutional.

I’m sorry that you read my saying ‘some’ Americans and citing the P of A as a troublesome issue as ‘putting down other countries’. I studied your government’s behaviour in international affairs (which was both depressing and infuriating) and I’ve seen the things it’s done these past one and a half terms (plus some other incidents along the way) and I don’t like many of the policies of the administration. That some (yes, it’s bold now because you seem to have missed seeing it first time out even though it’s right there in the cite) Americans are overly ‘patriotic’ is something that citizens of your own country right here in this thread admit so I’m not exactly sure why this constitutes ‘putting other countries down’. Unless, were I American, you were to consider me ‘unpatriotic’ for making such statements, in which case all would be clear.

I also don’t think Canada’s the epitome of perfection and, more to the point, I don’t need others to think so either. If you hate Canada, well fine. If you disliked the Canadian administration and had good reasons, I’d probably agree with you. So why must you get sniffy if I disagree with some of the Administration and some Americans and some policies? I have said more than once that there’s some places in the US I love to bits and that I’ve liked most of the Americans I have met but I make a distinction between a government and its people - in my country and in every other.

You do realize you may be making the OP’s point?

You do realize that’s ridiculous, right? The King was no more able to “start wars on a whim” than he was able to fly to Mars. Parliament held the reins of power, as indeed they had for many, many years prior and do to this day. The monarch was an active executive at that time, much more so than now, but he wasn’t an absolute ruler by any stretch of the imagination.

Great Britain was at the time probably the freest nation on earth; whitey maybe had a bit more government over his head there than in the USA, but was far, far, freer than anywhere else, and of course if your skin wasn’t white you were quite a bit better off in London than in, say, Raleigh.

Whoosh!, Sorry, I thought that was a blatant joke, especially the lame parallels of a leader named George that was the son of a leader named George.

Jim

Well, except that King George III’s father wasn’t named George. His father was Frederick Lewis, Prince of Wales. Prince Frederick died while his father, George II, was still on the throne, so Prince Frederick never became king.

Ok, I did not realize that. :smack:

You know, in ancient Rome, some slaves could become free. They could even get rich. Anyone could become a free man and a rich man in ancient Rome, even a slave! Stories of such slaves were highly touted in ancient Rome, even though most slaves never did get freed. Kept the slaves in line.