I'm really curious to know how our TP defenders feel about this one. The Tea Party believes in American EXCEPTIONALISM. They have been all over Obama for suggesting that America is exceptional to us, just as other countries are exceptional to their citizens.
Now here comes Donald Trump, aligning himself with the Birther Movement (right of Republican, fringe TP ideology). And yet, The Donald says America is the "laughingstock of the world" and no one says boo.
Does not compute (to me). Your thoughts???
Donald Trump, who has become the standard bearer for the birther movement, now says America is the laughingstock of the world.
It's unclear when exactly that happened, two years ago when President Barack Obama came on board or before, but The Donald seems pretty sure of it. The "Celebrity Apprentice" host told "Men's Journal" that he might even run for president because of our tarnished reputation.
"Right now, America is being taken to the cleaners by the Chinese," he told the Journal. "We’re being taken to the cleaners by OPEC. We’re being taken to the cleaners by virtually everybody that does business with us. We’re a laughingstock throughout the world. As president, I’d bring respect back to this country. Yes, I think I’d have to use the phrase 'You’re fired' a few times in that job. A lot of times. Too many."
My friends overseas do talk about this sudden "dumbing down" and radicalization of America. They are particularly amazed by the hell stirred up over healthcare reform. During the Bush years, we were looked upon as a bully. Now we are looked upon, at least by some, as a nation moving quickly toward fascism.
Oh, this one is easy!! Put the right guy in office and yes, exceptionalism can turn to one big, global joke!!
Throwing money at people that would like to destroy us helps, as well as having a movie star POTUS that specializes in campaigning, vacationing, lookin' good, and being VERY "cool."
What our country Needs is a good old fashioned 'dictator' and Trump fits that bill. Right? Joking, but I'm sure Trump will Not sell what is left of America to big biz, right? :0) This is a good point you make here.
Gads. An egotistical, mental dwarf who destroys business to prosper his own, who employs huge numbers of people under his dictatorship feels that America's reputation is tarnished and HE'S going to change that.
Uh huh. Kinda like Bank of America is going to restore America's tarnished reputation in an economic crisis.
I don't see America as a laughing stock at the moment.
I would have to change that opinion if Trump were successful in his challenge.
Just shows your full of it! Number 1 you don't live here, second why not give him a chance??? you talk out of both sides of your mouth. And I see the BBC over here and many in your country especially your parliament think Obama is a joke!
Well, seeing as how the topic was about how the rest of the world views Obama, I don't see how being a part of the rest of the world disqualifies me from having an opinion.
I wouldn't take too much notice of our right wing government, not many over here do.
well that is strange because I do a lot of business in the UK and I would honestly say out of the business people I deal with 7 out of 10 think he is bad! Go to canary wharf and do a survey! I would lay 1000-1 I win! I should be there in June or July I will meet you there and we will survey 100 people if you win I will give you $1,000 if I win you just do a hub on how you don't even know your own country, How is that?
Canary Wharf!! I doubt if you'd find one person there who would have a good word to say about Obama!
Fortunately, though they hold most of the power, the bankers don't actually dictate how we think.
LMAO now from one person we have everyone in Canary Wharf! OK like I said I'm taking smart business people my friend not the homeless or street punks. real people who work for a living, Intelligent people.
I'd argue the intelligent but not argue that you have picked on a right wing group of power brokers who are almost duty bound to hate anything that shakes their tiny world.
Do real people really "earn" bonus's in the millions?
some do, and taxes get taken out. I would say the average bonus is 250-500k if you produce. 40% right off the top!
Wow, I bet their little arms get tired making that many widgets!
What ! I don't believe you, you say they get their money by gambling with our money, no, that can't be true.
they do not gamble with your money! they invest, smart wealthy people get involved in this. sometimes people lose. but unless your a Qualified investor or a QIB qualified institutional buyer you can not play.
You need to do your homework, every business has fraudsters. need to be smart, no broke person lost money John I can assure you. the rich people and companies lost. that is why you need to be a qualified investor or Institutional Buyer. or small stock market player. no poor people lost money.
I'm a real person (yes, Mighty Mom is my given name -- I will bring forth my birth certificate just as soon as Obama produces his long form ).
But anyway, I only WISH real people like me got bonuses of $1 million or more (I would settle for a single mil).
We certainly work hard to earn the money we do get.
Would love to know where to sign up to get the big bucks.
Should I come to Canary Wharf?
should have went to school of investment banking and if you were skilled enough you would have made big bonuses. never too late mighty
That's so funny! That's about as realistic as telling me I should have gone to med school and become a brain surgeon!
I grew up in a NYC bedroom community with Wall Streeters all around. Not my milieu.
I grew up in Brooklyn from Immigrant parents. what is your point? I wrote many times how poor we were and was made fun of for wearing cheap clothes. If you truly wanted to be a brain surgeon you could have...believe it or not. I hope you do not discourage your kids if you have any.
"I hope you do not discourage your kids if you have any."
The 'Mom' part of her name is a clue....
Sorry I'm not like you I do not assume! that would be very stupid. So I Guess someone called superman is superman??? why not answer the question Mr. Know it all are you willing to bet? are you a man or mouse? "I BET YOU NEVER LEFT THE COUNTRY"
Hey Danny, give it a rest.
If you talk to Mighty Mom and NOT know she is a mother, then you're not paying attention.
MIGHTY - MOM are two separate words, not two words put together.
Not to mention, she has talked about her child, in many of her posts, which leads me back to saying you're not paying attention.
Sorry Cag I truly never heard her speaking of her kids. If I had known I would have known. I happen to Like Mighty a lot! I think she is wonderful. I do not dislike anyone, even my friend John. I just feel anyone can be anything they want here in the states and hate to her people being so negative.
No, but there is a more than passing chance that they are a man.
that would still be assuming! your wrong again. It is funny John I gave an answer you would typically give and now it is wrong. Just shows your arrogance and one sided socialistic views!
your views as a socialist have a lot to do with your thinking! and I'm happy you did acknowledge you are a socialist. socialism doesn't work, never has never will!
So, my reasoning that superman is most likely a man is down to my socialism! Wow.
I have never denied that I am a socialist, your claim that socialism never has worked and never will is at odds with the experience of many countries where it has been tried and succeeded.
keep twisting. show me where socialism has worked! I will be waiting! the system can never withstand itself, It has to implode. Again I will be waiting. And yes when someone believes in socialism they believe anyone who has money is evil. and more proof that the liberal left is turning socialist is they spew the same beliefs as you do. AN ADMITTED SOCIALIST. you just go against anyone who believes in a free market or conservative. thanks for clearing it for me.
Capitalism does fine then, it's not in the process of imploding then!
Of course we believe everybody with money is evil, we like nothing better than to pick them to pieces whilst eating babies and deflowering young girls (and boys).
I'd like to try a free market, unfortunately there is none, not by any definition of the word.
capitalism here in the states is in trouble because of the changes...adding many entitlements. The UK is going broke! I posted the female students rioting in the streets because they are raising tuition. greece had riots. Socialism can not work it is a proven fact.
Sweden and the Myth of Benevolent Socialism
by David Dieteman
"I was walking through Gamla Stan, the Old Town in Stockholm, when it struck me that Sweden was the only country I'd ever been in with no visible crazy people. Where were the mutterers, the twitchers, the loony importunate?"
P.J. O'Rourke, Eat the Rich, Ch. 4
Sweden is the poster state for those who believe in the power of the government to solve all problems.
Frequently referred to as a "benevolent" socialist or social democratic state, to distinguish it from the run-of-the-mill socialist butcher shop, such as Cuba, China, North Korea, the USSR, and most of Africa, Latin and Central America, and Asia, Sweden is the Promised Land of the Left. Where the USSR was a departure from the genius of Karl Marx, Sweden shows the potential.
(As an aside, O'Rourke notes that the US ambassador to Sweden at the time of his visit was Thomas Siebert. He was Bill Clinton's roommate at Georgetown. O'Rourke also notes that Mrs. Siebert is a friend of Hillary Clinton. Americans can stop wondering where the most intelligent and courageous female politician ever known finds inspiration for her collectivist dreams.)
As usual, the rosy picture painted by the Left could not be farther from the truth.
First, assume that everything the Left has to say about Sweden is true. This would only make Sweden the exception which proves the rule. In other words, even if Sweden were heaven on earth, this fails to answer the question of why Cuba, China, North Korea, the USSR, and most of Africa, Latin and Central America, and Asia are much more akin to Hell on earth.
Second, it must be noted that the touted stories of Swedish socialism, if not generally false, omit important facts.
For starters, unlike the godless state to which American leftists aspire, Lutheranism is the state-supported religion of Sweden. (Despite this fact, less than 10 per cent of Swedes regularly attend church).
With respect to claim that Swedish socialism shows the "success" of socialism, as O'Rourke notes, free trade reigned in Sweden from roughly 1846 until the Social Democrats were elected in 1932. After 1932, Sweden was helped by its neutrality in World War Two. Unlike Germany, Sweden's major cities were not bombed flat. The Social Democrats, then, had a great deal of wealth produced by capitalism and undamaged by war to share as political spoils.
According to a Swiss federal government statistical comparison of Switzerland and Sweden, the percentage of Swedish unmarried pregnancies in 1996 was 54% percent — roughly equal to the black community in the United States. The reason for this high rate of unwed pregnancies is apparent in both cases, and it is not illegal drugs: the state gives incentives to unwed mothers in the form of social benefits, with predictable results. Why go through the hassle of getting married or staying married when a government check means that such a decision has no practical consequences for your life? Over the long-term, a 54% illegitimacy rate can only undermine Swedish society.
Worst of all, the Swedes have not always acted benevolently, as reported on page A1 of the August 29, 1997, Washington Post,
From 1934 to 1974, 62,000 Swedes were sterilized as part of a national program grounded in the science of racial biology and carried out by officials who believed they were helping to build a progressive, enlightened welfare state...In some cases, couples judged to be inferior parents were sterilized, as were their children when they became teenagers.
Margot Wallstrom, the Swedish Minister of Health and Social Affairs, told the Post that "there was nothing secret about the sterilization program. It was carried out in the light of public debate at a time when Swedes believed they were creating a society that would be the envy of the world." The Swedish Institute for Racial Biology, founded in 1922, was the first national institute of the kind. The Swedes were also the first to sterilize the mentally ill, beginning in 1934.
One woman, aged 72 at the time of the Post article, was sterilized "because she couldn't read a blackboard because she did not have eyeglasses and was deemed to be retarded."
The Post also reports that Dagens Nyheter, the Swedish newspaper which ran a multi-part documentary of the sterilization program, contended that the ruling party at the time — the Social Democrats — "accepted the policy as an essential part of their overall philosophy." This claims is supported by the fact that, as noted above, the Social Democrats came to power in Sweden in 1932. In other words, they waited a mere two years before embarking on a program of eugenics. This would appear to make the eugenics program a high priority for the Social Democrats, as Dagens Nyheter contended.
The Irish Times of August 30, 1997, meanwhile, reports that "90 per cent of [those sterilizied] were women," and that "the practice, which predated and outlived Nazi Germany, started as an attempt to weed out perceived genetic weaknesses, mental or physical defectsand ended as a method of social control." According to Professor Gunnar Broberg, "Young girls were told they would be set free from [mental] homes and prisons ‘if we are allowed to make you calmer.'"
Interestingly, among the supporters of the sterilization program were Gunnar and Alva Myrdal, according to a 1991 Swedish radio documentary produced by Bosse Lindquist. Gunnar Myrdal was a socialist economist who shared the 1974 Nobel Prize for Economics with Friedrich Hayek. Gunnary Myrdal has also been praised as a "pioneer" in race relations.
Unfortunately, sterilizations are just the tip of the iceberg. As the Irish Times and Agence-France Presse reported on April 7, 1998, a Swedish Television documentary reveals that Sweden lobotomized perhaps 4500 "undesirables," in some cases without the consent of their families:
Some 500 lobotomies were conducted on patients who were not from mental hospitals...including a seven-year-old boy in Umeaa in northern Sweden in 1949. Diagnosed as "mentally retarded, hyperactive", he died during surgery."...One man featured in the documentary, who was lobotomised in 1963, is now 67 and has no concept of time, still believing that his children are small.
In part, the benevolent socialist government of Sweden hoped to discover whether "lobotomies could cure alcoholics and criminals."
Sweden also "forced hundreds of ‘mentally deficient' Swedes to let their teeth rot after being force-fed candy in dental experiments."
The allegedly "benevolent" Swedish social democrats, then, behaved very like the Nazis.
Sweden, however, is not alone in hiding its past. As the Irish Times also reports,
Since the Swedish revelations, other apparently "clean" countries have found similar skeletons in their cupboards. Both Norway and Denmark had similar policies. And this week a Swiss history professor, Hans Ulrich Jost, said Swiss doctors sterilised mentally-handicapped patients (again most of them women) against their will under a law passed in 1928. "Even Hitler requested a copy of the law from the canton and from the government in Berne as a basis for Nazi Germany's own racist laws."
The Washington Post claims that similar programs existed in Austria and Belgium, and the Telegraph (UK) recently reported that Norway sanctioned the physical and sexual abuse of children of occupying German soldiers born to Norwegian women.
As reported in the Telegraph,
victims have spoken out about the savage treatment meted out to them by the Norwegian government and by ordinary citizens during the postwar years for the crime of being Tyskerbarna or "German bastards". Many were locked away in orphanages or mental asylums for years — where they were subjected to sexual abuse — or had the "Germanness" beaten out of them by their Norwegian foster parents.
One girl, Tove Laila,
was taken at the age of one by the SS to her German grandparents in the east German city of Eberswalde in 1942 after her father was killed in action. Mrs Laila, now aged 59, remembers: "It was the happiest period in my life."
Alas, her happiness was not to last:
In 1947, under an agreement reached by the Allies and the Norwegian government, Mrs Laila was returned to her Norwegian mother where she was an unwelcome guest. Aged only six and speaking no Norwegian, she was beaten daily by her stepfather whenever she uttered a word of German. He later regularly sexually abused her.
The Norwegian attorney handling compensation claims against the government, Randi Hagen Spydevold, stated that "No attempt was made by the Norwegian authorities to check what kind of family Mrs Laila was being sent to. She suffered years of abuse because nobody was interested in her well-being." Mrs. Spydevold also stated that the Norwegian defense ministry and the CIA tested the effects of LSD on the children of German soldiers.
Predictably, the Norwegian government is fighting the compensation claims:
Norway's Social Democrat health minister, Tor Toenne, said: "They had an especially difficult childhood, but the misdeeds against these children were lapses. It is difficult to reconstruct what happened to them after so many years."
Right. Contrast this to the recent outrage over the claim that Swiss banks were holding money which was identifiable as having been stolen by the Nazis from Holocaust victims. Despite the fact that some of the victims in question had their property confiscated perhaps five to ten years before the Norwegian abuses began, these events took place at roughly the same time. Perhaps the Swiss just keep better records than the Norwegians.
Thankfully, the Norwegian victims are demanding justice:
The survivors are adamant, however, that the government should address one of the most shameful chapters in Norway's history. Gerd Fleischer, a 58-year-old Oslo charity organiser and the daughter of a German soldier and a Norwegian woman, said: "The terminology used to describe us was as bad as the Nazis in its contempt for mankind. I grew up as a second-class person in hell. As a civilised nation, Norway must finally apologise and bring all the facts to light."
Europe and the rest of the world indeed ought to face facts and admit their hypocrisy where eugenics and human rights are concerned.
Europe and the rest of the world should also give up their search for a magical socialist solution to the material conditions of human existence.
As Ludwig von Mises writes in The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality, it is capitalism — based upon individual liberty and private property — which has materially advanced human life from mud huts and horrific infant mortality rates to the comfort in which much of the world lives today.
It is also in capitalist nations — where the right to liberty and the right to property are protected — where men and women have been comparatively free from the eugenic nightmares of other nations. Although prisoners and "mental deficients" were sterilized in the United States, such programs never reached the levels they reached in Sweden, let alone in Germany under the National Socialists.
Mr. Dieteman is an attorney in Erie, Pennsylvania, and a PhD candidate in philosophy at The Catholic University of America.
"The Heritage Foundation’s Freedom Index gives Sweden surprisingly high marks because of its overall political and societal stability. Outside investors have largely agreed with the perception that Sweden is a safe, long-term bet."
what about that article I posted? how come in all the other socialist countries It doesn't work? How come Russia, Cuba, North Korea, and most of Africa, Latin and Central America, and Asia, has a problem?
Russia, not a socialist country, state capitalism more like.
Cuba, might just have been its near neighbours putting pressure on them.
And as for North Korea and most of Africa, Latin and Central America and Asia, what socialist countries?
atest: Do You Support Donald Trump for President? Vote Here Now.
Home | Herbert London
Tags: Barack Obama | Economic Crisis | London | Sweden | welfare | benefits | immigrants
Sweden a Perfect Example of Socialism Run Amok
Friday, 18 Jun 2010 11:21 AM
By Herbert London
More . . .
A A |
Email Us |
There is a contagion of madness in Western Europe. It is not merely the preemptive conciliation that afflicts politicians who are ready to subordinate Christian civilization to Islam; it is the wholesale program to promote socialism, even if it leads to economic ruination.
While over-extended socialist Europe faces collapse from Spain to Greece, overtaxed Sweden is eager to instruct immigrants on how to get free benefits from the government.
According to a proposal from Swedish Immigration authorities, all newly arrived immigrants will undergo courses in "societal values" and be taught about the unique qualities of the society. "Without knowledge of fundamental societal values an important prerequisite to be able to live and work in Sweden is lacking," writes Erik Amna in a debate article in the Dagens Nyheter daily.
Amna contends that the municipalities should offer a 60-hour course on three areas: values, the welfare state, and everyday life, i.e. practical knowledge of how the welfare state works. Not only will Sweden have generous give-away programs, but it intends to instruct new arrivals on how to obtain them.
Here is an unvarnished version of the plan that is destroying Europe. The idea that you can obtain these government benefits without a cost is absurd. There is no such thing as a free lunch even if Swedish authorities challenge that idea. Someone has to pay and the extortionate tax rate in Sweden indicates someone is paying.
The problem, of course, is that the high taxes, which serve as a transfer payment, stifle innovation and relegate a portion of the population into shiftlessness. While the cradle-to-grave welfare state has an appeal to economic tyros who believe money grows on trees, the lessons of welfarism are coming home to roost in the form of insolvency and contractual failure.
Sweden may not yet be in the position of Greece, but its policies will in time result in a similar outcome. There isn't a painless way out of the trap of socialism. What makes this journey inexorable is the belief benefit packages have to be disseminated to one and all, even new immigrants recently arrived on Swedish soil.
What this orientation does, of course, is create a lobbying group for further welfarism. It explains why retrenchment is so difficult. How do you remove what citizens are accustomed to receiving?
For years American socialists cited Sweden as the nation we should emulate and now Barack Obama seems to agree. But as Margaret Thatcher once noted socialism fails when you run out of other people's money. Alas, the unfunded liabilities in Sweden and the United States serve as a vivid reminder that at some point you must pay the piper.
The mounting debt across the European continent is weight on the shoulders of every resident. But apparently the Swedes are either blind to their predicament or choose to avert their gaze. How else can one explain proselytizing new immigrants so they request their government goodies?
The dream of a world of plenty, a cornucopia of all you want, has been transmogrified into a nightmare of debt and shattered promises. Sweden was the dream and for some it remains so, but the illusion cannot persist. The newly arrived immigrants instructed with Sweden's social values will soon become jaded when give-aways disappear as quickly as soap bubbles.
Read more on Newsmax.com: Sweden a Perfect Example of Socialism Run Amok
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
Ah, Fox News, a well balanced view!
[Was it a comedy show?]
Fox was not saying it! keep twisting. they had people from europe speaking. good try!
Er Danny, when you have biased media, they tend to pick up people who support that bias. After all, they'd look pretty stupid if they picked a group of people who disagreed with them wouldn't they?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_So … atic_Party
And the green party just lost the last election. tide is turning. very small country.
Again, what have my socialist views got to do with working out that superman is more than likely a man?
Talk about me twisting!
Philippine Islands - Hong Kong - Singapore - Kenya
My last trip out of the US was 2 weeks - Moscow and Saint Petersburg. I highly recommend 'White Nights' - St. Petersburg in late May - early June.
Visiting the birthplace of Obama?
Is that where his Presidential library will be?
The Hotel was not very good, the pics look great on the internet but was not good but right next to heath-row.
Never been to Russia, maybe one day. I do want to go to Egypt but to crazy over there, I always wanted to see the pyramids in person.
Exceptional? vs Laughingstock?
I would say America has been a laughingstock for a good couple hundreds now.
What makes it a laughingstock? It's people.
The amount of willful ignorance and the dumbing down effects by the powers that be is why people are laughingstock material.
More than half of them couldn't tell you the Pledge of Allegiance.
More than half of them couldn't tell you about the Constitution.
More than half of them couldn't be bothered to vote.
More than half of them couldn't mind their business if paid to do so.
More than half of them couldn't even understand their own rights.
And, on top of that- more than 3/4 of them are barely surviving as it is now.
"I would say America has been a laughingstock for a good couple hundreds now."
"What makes it a laughingstock? It's people."
You know of another country that has done so much in so little time?
The people did that.
Don't bother responding, its not worth my time.
The British weren't laughing in the REvolution, nor were they laughing in 1812. The whole of Europe wasn't laughing...TWICE. Cag. I can't believe that you are that unpatriotic. What has made us a laughingstock is the fact that our political sys. rots. Carter? Reagan? Clinton? Bush? x2???
The fact is, our nation isn't of the people, by the people and for the people and hasn't been for some time, but, I assure you, it isn't a situation that extends any further back than the world wars.
Cagsil's just a hater. Anything to insult the things America stands for... You know, like individualism. American history proves that free people do more, achieve more, and ARE more, if they retain their freedoms. So, America must be discredited, so that the central planner types (like the ussr) can claw their way back to power and control you for their purposes.
I have to agree with you!
Our people are "dumbed" down!
I for one will vote for anyone who runs against Mr Trump. They say it will take a ruthless businessman to turn this country around, but he is probably one of the worst choices. He has proven more than once that he can't take care of his own money, and now might want to be president of the country which bailed him out.
It's going to take a statesman to change what other countries think of us not a business man. The people who live here have let people who really don't care run our country for way too long. What ever happened to "We the people". I don't even know if anyone exists in this country who really cares about all the things necessary to turn America into what the people who signed the declaration of independence meant it to be. One nation under God.
I have noticed for years when I vote its always been for the lesser of two or three evils.
I can see how you misunderstood my post as you don't know me and I admit I didn't give enough clues.
My point was we are all born with certain personality traits and talents. Things we naturally gravitate to.
Making gobs of money as a banker would not be a natural career choice of me. I'm not wired that way. And having lived through periods where my neighbors lost their jobs on Wall Street (the good times are great, but the bad times are brutal) I know I don't have the stomach for high finance.
Same with brain surgery. My hand-eye coordination and fine motor skills would make that particular profession pretty much impossible for me.
I hope that explains it adequately.
But I will thank you to leave mention of my son and his career aspirations out of it. That is crossing a line you really don't want to cross. Any one of my friends here can tell you why. Or perhaps go read some of my hubs.
Mighty I would never say a bad thing about your kid/s As you stated you could see how I misinterpreted your post. yes I do know! It is extremely stressful and has its good and bad, but like anything if you really put in your time and work hard it pays. All I was saying is was even If I did not think one of my kids would not like a certain career I would not burst their bubble. I would just bring out the points of concern and than it is their choice. This country is (hope it stays that way) the best. plenty of opportunity if your hungry enough.
I understand your point, Danny.
America definitely is the land of opportunity.
I wouldn't go quite so far as to say anyone can do anything they put their mind to.
Honestly, I could put my mind to becoming a brain surgeon and it would be a waste of time. That is just not my calling.
Left brained/right brained dichotomy...
All work has value. I strongly believe if you have an aptitude and passion in a certain direction and can make money at it, go for it.
When it when it went from "By the people for the people" to for the corporation by the corporation. The "Hanging chad",two planes three buildings, two holes, no wreckage or bodies and security tapes vanish. WMD,s ,oops we couln't find any. Underground cities in caves in Afghanistan, "Mission Accomplished".The banksters and Wall Street crashed the world economy and then we cave them more money to play with and reward themselves.Our politicians are bought from day one and for "The President",we could put a Mr.Bill up behind that podium and this country wouldn't miss a beat.Why?, he's not running anything he's just the spokesman for whoever is doing this to us. Who the hell in their right mind would want that job.They all seem to be "Taken Care of" when they leave but look at what they have to live with. Don't bad mouth any of the politicians for their stupid decisions either. http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley
The UK is going broke because of global recession and US founded wars, not because of any socialist leanings.
Rather than post a mass of copy and paste, why don't you tell me in your own words why it is a proven fact that socialism can not work?
I did actually read all your copy and paste, did you?
I've no time for anybody who thinks that Nazis were socialists, it shows a lack of research and understanding. Probably a fair bit of prejudice as well.
Well said. But, I would add that Tony Blair was all for the war on terrorism, and, it is a fact that British colonial attitudes and their undying support of the U.S. was contributory to the present situation. After all, their cooperation in the founding of the modern state of Israel can't be denied, and further, that the Palestinian situation has been one of the main points of the present unrest.
You know Danny, I think it's hilarious how you keep telling me that I'm not American and therefore have no right to criticise the US but when you seek anybody to support your twisted view of the world you pick out Americans, not natives of the country that you wish to criticise.
Some people's kids! I admit that American foreign policy is at the crux of the matter. On the American side, though, Obama is viewed by many as almost groveling. We detest that attitude, and I think I speak for the majority of citizens when I say that.
I can see how that rankles, but most of the rest of the world likes a president who doesn't treat the rest of the world as the 51st state of the US.
Well that is the paradox of American conservatism John. If you are viewed "favorably" by the rest of the world, in the minds of many conservatives, you are "weak" or conciliatory; you are jeopardizing American sovereignty. If you considered as a "bully" on the international block, then you are "upholding American values," America's place in the world.
I believe that is likely the most fundamental difference between conservative and liberal thinking - at least on the stage of foreign policy.
Right on. It is amazing that those who think that Almerica should never try to be liked by the rest of the world are now saying that we should listen to those in other countries who think we are a laughingstock. I wonder if these are the same people who said that Saddam Hussein was crazy and we couldn't believe anything he said. But when he said he had WMD we should believe him. When Obama tried to undo the damage Bush did to our reputation, he was accused of anti-Americanism. Now he is accused of damaging our reputation. If we are such a laughingstock why is it that other countries follow our lead and ask for our help when they are faced with natural or political disaster?
Exceptional no, just unique. Laughingstock, yes if he runs and win!
I grew up in a socialist country. We had to hate Ameriaca, it was our policy. We were supposed to hate it and to be scared of it. One day it may come and destroy our "socialist freedom". It was government policy. Of course in reality no one hated it. People admired and envied its prosperity, richness, openness, its freedom, freedom to live your life the way you can. To be rich if you can, to be poor if you cannot be rich, but be you. A person, a human being with dignity and your unique qualities. And everybody who somehow could run away, tried to run away to America. Remember, guys, that after World War II, you, Americans enjoyed your freedom, you were building more and more of everything, but Europe was in ruins. They had to build, rebuild everything from scratch. People had to be frugal, to live modestly, to starve even. I remember my mom told how happy she was when my dad managed to buy a piece of material so she could make a dress for herself. You in America never knew that. So now you cannot be that rich, so what? Learn to live with less. Build roads where you can walk not drive only. I am sure Obama does his best, he is not stupid. And if you do not like him so much, you'll elect somebody else in 4-5 years. It's not like you have to live under his ruling until he dies. Love your country and do not blame your people. They are too used to a good worry free life, to have plenty of everything. May be they should starve a little? Speeds your metabolism, you'll start think faster .
by Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago
If Donald Trump is elected as President of the United States, what will be YOUR reaction? Why?
by JOC 6 months ago
A person answered the question, "Why are people so hostile towards President Donald Trump?".Chris O'Leary:I’ll take a stab at this. Before you pass my answer off as “Another Liberal Snowflake” consider that 1.) I'm an independent centrist who has voted Republican way more often in my life...
by Scott Belford 20 months ago
This is really two part question. The first part is the above question. The other is a slight twist, to wit: "Is President Trump Turning Out to an Existential Threat to Ideals Which America Represents?"The reason I ask is because consequences are becoming evident from his nine...
by Scott S Bateman 5 months ago
Well, yes. The answer is obvious.1) They oppose background checks and other gun laws so mentally unstable people can buy assault rifles and commit mass murders like in Orlando and Connecticut.2) They favor multi trillion dollar wars chasing weapons of mass destruction that don't exist instead of...
by IslandBites 3 years ago
“I am the king of debt,” Mr. Trump once said on CNN. “I love debt.”A New York Times investigation into Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's US real-estate holdings revealed that companies he owns have at least $650 million in debt — twice the amount that Trump's public filings, made as...
by Susan Reid 7 years ago
I read this in my local paper yesterday. What do you think?Is "exceptionalism" a good word or a bad word?Does it describe what America was? What America is today?By Kathleen ParkerSunday, January 30, 2011 He didn't say it. That word: "exceptional." Barack Obama described an...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|