Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Read this carefully (if you want), it's just something I'm wondering about ---

If Hollywood movies tell the stories Americans want to hear there seems to be some evidence pointing towards my question. In that respect there's at least three different kinds of movies:

first: a plain and simple American fighting evil and corrupt (although fellow American) police, secret service, military, lawyers, lobbyists and government agencies. Examples: the first two parts of Rambo, most of X Files, I guess many others will come to your mind

second: an American becoming a terrorist and turning on the (apparently) even more evil and corrupt American government. Example: Red Alert (doesn't Tommy Lee Jones play a Vietnam vet?), some of the X Files as well

third (and most disturbingly): this whole genre of movies set in they near future where the Land of the Free has come under a post-apocalyptic totalitarian violent regime. Examples: the original Rollerball, Deathrace, Escape from LA I think it's called, even Barb Wire.

Another hint: lots of "disaster" movies (Independence Day for example) or books like The Stand have these scenes of looting mobs and mass panic and, in general, the collapse of order and the government acting violently, lying, covering up, hiding, dissolving.

So --- my question: if all of that actually portrays the way Americans feel, do they hate themselves? How come they don't seem to trust their great system which they put up themselves and which is still the first and most successful democracy in the world?

I was preparing a smartass response but I see you are not trying to be an ass so I will make this very simple: All those examples you gave are Fiction. The characters work for the advancement of the story. I'm sure there might be some people that might relate but I dont think any of those examples represent a large part of the populations sentiments.  :peace:

sure I know it's fiction but since they make movies people obviously want to see I still think it reflects in some way the way they feel --- you know it's a national pasttime to be suspicious of the government: people seem to generally take it as a fact that they're being lied to and being tricked into things, nobody seems to expect that the others are honest with them

think of this guy, the brother of this other guy who helped Tim McVeigh blow up this building, you know, keeping weapons, building bombs --- like it or not, he's an American original because I couldn't think of another environment creating such a phenomenon --- maybe a civil war country with 30 years of guerrilla fighting going, but not a country that has enjoyed democracy for 228 years

It's simply that Hollywodd is basically a Communist nation in and of itself, and despises everything real America stands for.  Sounds simplistic, but it's not...the reason is simple, in that actors generally feel they need a cause in order to leave a legacy, since they don't want to be remembered for pretending for a living!  The easiest causes to support tend to be leftist, since they only require the appearance of caring and no practical solutions, thus the entire Hollywood culture is built around the idea that America is an evil place.
The majority of Americans don't subscribe to this philosophy, but it's simple to understand and provides for a clear-cut villian as well as pretty clear solutions to moivie problems and big special-effects laden battles and neat quotable catchphrases in a world that is generally much more complex.  Bottom line:  these movies are fun to watch, and I love 'em!

As far as celebrities trying to be activists, I'm of the "Shut up and do your job of entertaining me" school but there are exceptions.  Bono is a good one...he's a rock star, but he has spent DECADES studying the spread of AIDS and international monetary issues.  I disagree with some of his conclusions, but I respect his knowledge and educated opinions, unlike, say Richard Hatch.

All of that said, I know that what really sets a democratic republic apart is the right to disagree.  While I feel that Michael Moore is a lying buffoon. I would take a bullet to guarantee his right to present his opinions in a public. forum.

/Mike

Ok now you made a good example with McVeigh. No matter which party is in office, odds are about half of the country is going to be pissed about it. I think our system is antiquated and needs an overhaul. We've been letting politicians run this for along time and we have the largest debt to show for it, I believe.

I dont know if Ross Perot was the right person for the job but I liked the idea of putting a business man in charge of the country. It might have caused a strain internationally, but ultimately we would start helping ourselves more and hopefully keep our noses out of other countries business.

I really dont like the way things are run now, I know both sides of the main political parties are lying to us, but yet it doesnt make me want to go blow up a building with children going to kindergarten either. I look at it this way, it could be better definitely, but it could also be a hell of alot worse, and as McGann stated I am at least able to say whats on my mind with out........................ wait a second theres some men in suits here to see me, be right back. I hope.

:lmao:

you see --- that's what I'm talkin' about. You know they're going to get ya

It seems like two different topics are being discussed.....

And I don't understand either

At least I got a laugh out of the title

 :smoking: Izzy? :smoking:

...And thats different than any other thread on these boards, how? :hihi:

Like Kujo, I originally was going to make a smart ass response.  Im not sure the title of the thread fits the substance.  I think a lot of it actually goes all of the way back to the Revolution and the colonies, and americans general fear of government.  This heightened to dramatic proportions during the cold war.  I think it is simply enterntainment.  For every government corruption movie, there are 10 that are terrorist type movies.  Usually it is not the entire american government that is corrupt, but a few bad apples.  But this just goes to show, a lot of people get their sense of America based on movies.

I just imagine that people who have got half a continent for a country could afford to relax a little

this is your premise, I take it?  I think you're forgetting a key factor in movies, and that is escapism.  You mention X-Files twice - you'd better realize people watch it for the pure pleasure of escapism.  I know I do.  It's the same reason one reads comics with superheroes, which are also very popular in America.


Reading the UK election thread, it would seem that English people feel the same way about their government.  And the same disillusionment is also apparent in the Canadian election thread!!   I think it's natural  - no governing organization can please everyone, and it's better to err on the side of skepticism than to be a blind patriot. do you agree?

I also somewhat agree with McGann in that Hollywood and its content isnt exactly representative of America.  Just because I pay $8.50 to watch and enjoy Sin City, it doesnt mean I think America is corrupt as that.  It was just fun to watch, purely for escapism.

8.50$?! hell!

mmh, now that you mention it, I remember a survey where people in different countries were asked, who do you trust most to defend your case?

of course, politicians and unions were ranking lowest, that's no surprise but in Britain and in the US people also said they don't trust lawyers, attorneys and judges, and that was in fact different from most European countries. In the US, it's clear that nobody wants to change the court system but many people say that it doesn't always do a good job finding justice

again, that seems to be something genuine American: lawyer movies and books! I mean all this John Grisham stuff, and he doesn't do anything but rave about the deficits in the system

still, I'm not trying to put anybody down, I'm just curious

Guess you have a point. But this one split right away....

1) There are lots of OTHER types of movies made, too.  Love stories, comedies, cartoons, sci fi, horror...most of which don't fit into your categories.

2) Your persective is very Freudian.  However, even Freud once said "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".  Americans, as a whole, like escapism....all kinds of escapism.  I think it's tough to pigeonhole any society simply by SOME of the varying types of entertainment we consume.  It would be like saying all French People are brain dead idiots becuase of that song by that kid that went to #1 on the French charts.  Or like saying all Canadians are effeminate because Celine Dion and Brian Adams happen to hail from that country.

3) Timothy McVeigh was a whacko and hardly an original anything. Nor were those that aided him. There have been malcontents througout history (the IRA, for example....Jack the Ripper, for example....Stalin, for example), some who were successful and some who were not.  McVeigh WAS successful.  That's the only thing that distinguishes him from any of the thousands of malcontents who attempt "terrorism" in every other country around the world.

well as far as the Canadians are concerned you could put up Bret Hart, half of the WWE and lots of country music singers against that ---

I ain't got no clue if I'm right or wrong, I just thought I'll point out a couple of things that seem to stand out when you look at it from the outside

could be humanity just has a soft spot for watching its own demise --- "one day / they might get to see a face they know"

A lot of other non-Americans seem to get their ideas and viewpoints on American culture based on American cinema.  I can't blame them, it's our number one export.

You have to keep in mind - most, if not all, of mainstream American cinema comes from liberals in Hollywood, and they do not represent mainstream America.  They represent the elitist of the elite of the liberals out there, which is more extreme than even your average liberal American.  The obsession with violence and sex all stems from that, even though much of America is nothing like that.

Americans are great but sometimes they are dumb (come on guys get a social security for everybody, abolish the death penality). I've never agreed and accepted this global anti-american hostility, for me this is definitely racism (that's one of the reasons I'll never vote for the left). America is a great country. However you should change your president. Hillary would be great for 2008 8)

Remember when reading something like this.... the source.

This is from a right wing thinker who uses catch words like "elitist" and "liberal" as dirty words (propaganda speak) to describe Hollywood.

America is fascinated with guns (NRA-Right wing), and sex (Bill O'reilly-Right wing talking head) comes to mind quite a bit.

Movies are made to MAKE MONEY. Their story lines are created to draw the bucks in. Nothing more, nothing less.

This flim flam about "the majority of America is not like this" is laughable. Well...no shit! Really? You don't say? Well maybe they don't LIVE LIKE THAT, but they sure as hell like to escape their everyday lives like that (based on the type of movies out there alone). So who is watching these movies then? Only evil elitist liberals? Hardly.

The obession with violence all comes from the evil liberal Hollywood film producers? Ha!!


So why could people think we are are a violent nation?

You have to look no further than your dickhead in the whitehouse to see who used VIOLENCE FIRST.

OK, fair enough.  Maybe I overstated my case a little, but my main point is that most other nation's image of us comes from our MOVIES, and our MOVIES are extremely violent, regardless of who made them, or who goes to see them.


That's a separate issue, but the fact of the matter is, this view of America has been around a lot longer than just when Bush did his thing.  It's not like this anti-Americanism is new.

I know from talking to a lot of middle easterners (since my dad's job directly relates to working with people all over the world) that a big part of their view of America comes from our movies.   That's the simple truth of the matter.

+ 1. Very true. In Europe Anti-Americanism is a national sport. It's a shame because you save us twice from the chaos. people have a short memory.

That's a separate issue, but the fact of the matter is, this view of America has been around a lot longer than just when Bush did his thing.? It's not like this anti-Americanism is new.

I know from talking to a lot of middle easterners (since my dad's job directly relates to working with people all over the world) that a big part of their view of America comes from our movies.? ?That's the simple truth of the matter.

So you can cling to that, but deny that maybe there is a newfound view of America being violent because of our military actions abroad?

You can't have it both ways.

You say America's precieved violent personality is liberal Hollywoods fault; I offer another avenue.

Your perspective can not be the only truth, nor can mine, but I ain't gonna read you saying it's the evil libs at it again. Not when our government is dropping bombs.

Well, ya did read it, and I'm all for dropping bombs on tyrants like Saddam.  : ok:

It seems really unfortunate to me.   That's the impression I got from the time I spent in Europe.  Most of the people were actually very nice to me, personally, though.

sure they are very nice. you were a tourist so you were $$ for them. don't forget it. You'll always be welcome as soon as you are a tourist and you bring $$. But don't be naive, there is a strong anti-americanism in the public opinion, especially since the gulf war 2 as I suppose there might be a strong hostility towards french people in the US and it's also very bad. However, I learnt that the most virulent anti-americanism? comes from Germany. But when you're a tourist all is different, there are things you can't see because you are just in holidays. All is different. Last year I heard someone at school telling me "we must kill all the americans". I was like "WTF?". He was very serious. He was a very well educated person, not retarded, very clever and intelligent but... it's like if he didn't measure the impact of what he said. it wasn't shocking for him, it was natural when he said "we must kill all the americans".?
For me America and Americans are my partners, not my enemies. later, i'd like to create an european/american association.

Sorry. In my book you can't approve of real life brutality and then cry about liberal hollywood types making films. Makes you a hypocrite, or in denial, or both.

I approve of the use of violence in specific cases.  I don't see how you can lump all "real life brutality" together - obviously, there are difference cases and different variables.  I strongly doubt you disapprove of all uses of violence, and if you do, then....  I don't know what to tell you.   

It's easier to say "I hate USA" than "I hate the foreign policy and the politics of the USA".

Even some Americans themselves don't like what their president is doing and they get labeled "non-patriotic".


You seem to forget the reason why there's people who don't like the USA. It's got nothing to do with WW2. Things have changed since then. Look back at the time of the Vietnam war and compare to today.




/jarmo

It boils down to the same thing, though, right?

Everybody hates america for one reason:fear. Canadians fea the Americans would counquer them, Europeans fear the Americans because America a war-hungry machine that drags everybody else into it and american people fear america because they're afraid that their government will crumble and everybody will be screwed

Do they not describe Hollywood?  They are not necessarily dirty words, it is just describing what it is.  You then come to the conclusion that are being used in a dirty way. 

What a stupid fucknig statement.  You attack Loretians characterization of those in Hollywood, then you do the same name calling in regards to this adiministration.

Consider the source.

Sometimes art imitates life, sometimes it doesn't. Hollywood is a very poor depiction of the USA.

Most Americans are good, hard working people. I wish other countries could see that the common American person doesn't have any control over the White House and decisions regarding war. The president makes those choices.

As far as Americans hating themselves, I think there may be a collective frustration, but not hatred.  The system isn't that great. Medicare is lousy. Job wages are low, etc.. Things could be better.

This post made the most sense thus far.

Most Americans are hard working good people. Most are scared and stretched financially I think. It keeps them from digging too deep for questions, since they don't have time, or more personal issues to attend to.

America is young and heading in a bad direction for the general public. Hopefully it will become what it once was, that is, for the people.

Do they not describe Hollywood?  They are not necessarily dirty words, it is just describing what it is.  You then come to the conclusion that are being used in a dirty way. 

These are foxspeak words you guys throw out when you don't like somebody. It's become common to hear all the right-wing talking heads use these terms. It is used to draw in the average guy...especially hearing words like "elitist".

Boring drone talk....and no I don't think it describes Hollywood.

Hannity, O'reilly, Rush etc hate Hollywood because there are actors you use who they are to speak out (against what they believe). However you never hear the right wing ditto heads complaining when Mel Gibson or Ron Silver use there Hollywood influence to draw attention to their (right wing) political agenda. Nor do any of you guys complain or call them "elitists".

You watch these shows, hear what they say and repeat it. Nothing more, nothing less. Ignoring the hypocritical nature of your entire "argument".

What a stupid fucknig statement.  You attack Loretians characterization of those in Hollywood, then you do the same name calling in regards to this adiministration.

I'm just giving tit for tat.

If he is going to try to make this an "evil Liberal" issue, which he started, it was his can of worms he opened, then he should look at both sides. Invading a country that did not attack us (yea 50% believe it was ok, but 50% don't , plus the rest of the world), right wing backing of the NRA, pro-death penalty, all may contribute to why people think we are a violent nation.

Maybe you'd be more at home on the Sean Hannity boards.

Ok the reason why I "hate" the USA is because they like to change the past in their advantage...changing facts and such..The only reason why they "saved" us in WWII is because their economy was on it's ass and they needed a boost in that (read Marshall Plan), so "helping" out the europeans at a moment that the enemy was at his weakest was only in their own interest.
Where it really only the Americans who saved us? I remember more countries helping us out....

Also all this bad blood against Americans (for me personally) is set by your current president, by saying (when starting the war against iraq) that if you're not with us you're against us....that isn't wise to say...but then again...hmmm...i'm gonna keep that comment to myself ;)

It's easy to project a black/white opinion..but if you (read: americans) just think about it you must know that the ppl don't think about all of the American citizens that way.

One point:  The US did not "help out" in WWII because our economy was on it's ass.

Pearl Harbor is the reason the US "helped out" in WWII.

At least, if by "helped out", you mean with our military going over to actually fight...which is when the actual tide of the war changed.

If you mean "helped out", in the sense that we sold you goods, weapons, and other things at deeply discounted prices (specifically NOT profiteering, in many cases) PRIOR to Pearl Harbor...I'd like to think that was a "we'll scratch your back, you scratch ours" situation.  We WERE in rough shape....largely because of the market crash which was facilitated, in many ways, by the uncertainty and turmoil in Europe.  But the Europeans were also having a rough time getting supplies, since the German Blitzkrieg was doing a number on Englands manufacturing capability and France was, largely, in ruins already.  The "deal" with the US allowed the Europeans to resupply from a "safe" industrialized manufacturing nation...and allowed the US to stimulate, albiet minorly, it's crushed economy.

In reality, most of the economic stimulus that we recieved from WWII was largely attributed to the efficiency of our manufacturing capabilities.  Lines that were, after the war, used to make cars, kitchen appliances, etc had been "fine tuned" during the war to ensure that weapons, mess kits, etc were churned out quickly, with very high quality, to supply the troops.  Sure, we also reaped some other economic benefits by being able to resupply a war torn Europe, once the fighting stopped.  We also lent France and England vast amounts of money....money that, to this day, we have never demanded be repaid.  Now, much of that money came back to the US, indirectly, in goods and services...which, I'm sure, was a motivating factor is lending it in the first place, but still....

The tide of the war changed when the Germans lost at Stalingrad.

True, though you'll note that the offensive to capture Stalingrad occurred in June of 1942 and lasted into 1943, if I remember correctly....More than 6 months after Pearl Harbor, and well after the US had mobilized troops to fight in Europe.? This lead to Germany having to fight a much more vigorous 2 front war than they would have otherwise had to, had the US not been involved.? It caused less resources, and an even thiner supply line, to the troops who were sent to Stalingrad.? Combine that with Hitler's classic blunder of splitting up Army Company South into 2 components (one to capture the oil fields in Caucasas and one sent to Stalingrad) and you have a weakend German army heading right into the lions mouth of a very determined Soviet Army (who, while vastly underequipped, were, perhaps, the toughest "soldiers" of their day).?

Thus, why I said the US's entry into the war was when the tide turned.? The Battle of Stalingrad was, I think, the moment the Allies completely turned the corner.? It reinvigorated moral and blunted the German Army beyond any real chance of recovery.

Agreed with everything but this, I've always been under the impression that the Russians sucked in every aspect except their huge numbers, and that their method of winning was just sending hordes of troops at the enemy. Perhaps the image is partly result of the wars against Finland during WW2, where nearly ten Russians died for each fallen Finn. Also, when you look at total losses for USSR during WW2, it's hard to think of the soldiers as very tough...

Hollywood is not a good portrayal of Americans. Unfortunately, most outside the USA get their info on our culture from movies.

We don`t all agree with our President`s decisions. He won re-election with only 51% of the vote. Many of us wanted a change, but did not have the confidence John Kerry could competently do the job.

I certainly don`t hate myself or my life. I live in Florida and have a good life here & a successsful business.  And yes I do not fully trust my government. ( I form my own opinion rather than believe everything I am told). Blind faith into anything is bad. (Even in Axl)

I dont know when Gibson ever said anything political regarding our leaders or our war.  He doesnt call our government stupid and doesnt pretend to have a phd when he didnt even graduate from high school.  In fact, probably every mention of him on this board was in regards to the Passion.  He received more shit for that movie than anyone.

Dont watch these shows much.  Sorry.  Instead of refuting the comments, you call us followers.  How much independent thought comes out of your Conservative, Bush, and War bashing?  No too much my friend.

The thing is, you dont just give it tit for tat.  It is usually such name calling that brings us into the debate in the first place.

He never said "evil."  He is just simply pointing out the unrefuted fact that 90% of hollywood are liberal.  You dont think that is portrayed at all in movies?  If someone said talk radio makes it look like all Americans love their country, Im sure you would point out that all talk radio is basically conservative.

You characterize the right wing in the same negative light as you claim we characterize the left wing.  Who is the hypocrite?  Im not going to disagree that this is why other countries have that view towards us.  However, we are our own nation, and I dont think we should change our laws to accomodate what other people think our laws should be.  That is a key difference between Conservatives and Liberals.  I also think that people outside America are strongly misinformed about these issues inside America.   

A statement like this would make you leave this board for a month.  Believe it or not, Im not much of a Sean Hannity fan.  I do believe he is a talking points guy with little original thought.  I dont listen to him or watch him.  I think it is good to have a board with a difference of opinion.  But it doesnt suprise me, like most liberals at University campuses, that you want the Conservatives to go away so that you can have a board full of like minded people so that you are never criticized and that you can pat each other in the ass

europe has always hated the US, and they always will hate the US.

but the feelings are mutual.

and you think they hate us now.....just wait til we win the world cup.  :rofl:

It's true they needed numeric superiority to be trully dangerous...largely because they were so ridiculously underequipped....which is precisely why they are regarded by many as being so tough.  These guys fought with the equivalent of rocks and sticks (not literally, obviously), against opponents who were equipped vastly better than they were.  But they didn't lay down arms...they fought knowing they were more than likely to die.  They fought in conditions (weather, etc) that would have ruined most regimented armies in equipment that did very little to protect them.  They were undertrained, out gunned, and up against what was widely considered the most effective fighting force on the planet at that time: The German Army.  And they won.  Granted, they did have a shorter supply line, and the bonus of almost limitless reinforcements, a luxury the Germans did not enjoy.  But still.....there's many things you can say about the Soviet Army.  But you can't deny they were tough SOBs....

you mean pay for it? you'll have to do better than beating trinidad by the odd goal

btw such generic statements mean nothing...always the extreme with you isnt it? got to shove peoples opinions into the corner...


Stalingrad was the first major battle that the germans lost in WW2, and the americans and british were fighting the italians in sicily around the same time...
in fact the americans/british didnt make it out of italy until the middle of 1944 and d-day wasnt until the middle of 1944 too...by that time the russians had beaten the german army time and time again and taken most of their country back and more

i guess you missed the last world cup when america made it to the second round and completely outplayed germany (2nd place finisher). AND the fact that we have been ranked in the top 10 for a few years now. AND we continue to improve.

not sure what you're talking about me "shoving people's opinions into a corner". a few people in this thread said they hate america (which apparently means they hate america's politics). well, there's plenty of americans who "hate" europe because they disagree with their politics.

and no one has ever been labeled as "non-patriotic" because they disagree with one party or the other. and statements like that prove that the rest of the world do not understand america at all.

|
|
v


Right-o?

you are only in the top 10 because you play countries like haiti, trinidad, panama, honduras,guatemala,grenada, el salvador,costa rica,jamaica...the only real competition you have is mexico and they are only  one of the top countries because of the same reason...in reality if you had to play stronger sides you would be in the 30's-40's rather than the top 10...thats also why iran are number 19 and costa rica are 22 ahead of far superior teams like nigeria and korea

thanks for elaborating

You wanna talk about "boring drone talk" SLCPUNK?

You're the guy who is always crying "Foxspeak this" and "Foxspeak that" but has never been willing to acknowldege any bias in the media your way.

I think just about anyone who has been on this board for any substantial length of time is all too familiar with "SLCPUNK -speak."

You're as predictable as they come.


While I'm not even sure what you're talking about in regards to Ron Silver, exactly what "right wing political agenda" did Mel Gibson have?? Since Gibson is against the war in Iraq (like yourself), I have to assume you must be talking about something else.? Is it The Passion of the Christ?? By all means clarify...


You're correct, many of them do that and loose much of their credibility in the process.? But others make a lot of sense which you tend to disregard.

But this also shouldn't surprise anyone being as you're the guy who touts, of all things, Al-Jazeera.


While I am the last person to believe the U.S. should base it's policy on what the rest of the world thinks, I would say your assumptions that everyone outside America agrees with your point of view might be a bit of a stretch.?

Like those within our own nation, those who happen to agree with you elsewhere often tend to be the most shrill in vocalizing their opinions.?



I'd say the same for you and moveon.org except for the fact that their pretty much obselete now.

Yes but if Germany wasn't already fighting the United States, England, and others on the western front the Nazi's would have absolutely crushed the Russian army.

Once again, as I pointed out to Skeletor above, if Germany wasn't already fighting the Americans and the British on the western front, they would have easily defeated the Russians.

I think it's funny in a way that all the Americans who've ever been to Europe say how well they've been treated --- what do you expect? An angry mob chasing you down the street as soon as you mention you're American? Come on --- maybe American rednecks would do that, though

back to topic I thought up something else: the roots of American democracy are very small administrative units - counties. I've always found it impressing how active and dedicated Americans are on that basic level (is "grassroots" the right word?) - they run for all kinds of public jobs, help each other and all of that. However, everything beyond the county line already seems to be foreign --- ideally and comically represented by that dude with his suit and horse and carriage coming from afar trying to sell magic potions. That's an American original as well - maybe it's another symbol of the archetypical (is that a word?) smalltown America that has eventually spread to cover this huge country

and as some posters have already mentioned, Americans themselves consider their system rather antiquated

Is some European countries Americans are treated just fine. 

Other's negative reputations are well deserved.

As Axl'srant pointed out (and I mentioned in my initial post), again, the Germans were aiding the Italians and fighting a two front war.  One front was against the European countries which had been newly re-enforced (and re-invigorated) by US troops and equipment.  That, combined with Hitler's inane decision to split up Army Company South was a LARGE reason the Russians were able to pull off the defeat of the Germans in Stalingrad.  This continued to be a large factor in their continued victories...Germany was being "squeezed" on both sides.

you've been tricked by pickpockets or what? They do that to everybody


and since somebody came up with World War Two: as soon as they had America's vast economic power fully behind them it was clear (if it wasn't before) that the Brits would not settle for less than the complete defeat of the Third Reich

--- and after the Invasion was completed successfully the race was pretty much run

I'm not sure why more Americans don't run for public office.? I assume it's commitment.? "Local officers" usually combine their service along side their career, not doing it AS their career.? Career politics, especially early on, is very expensive.? Mid-level office, where you're expected to make the service your career isn't exactly well paying...leaving you to supplement that with some sort of additional income.? That means you either have "rich" politicians at that level, or you're left with those who have a career path that allows part time/consulting work.? That whittles the pool of candidates down quickly.

And, again, the "potion seller", or pedlar/flim flam artist, is hardly an American Original.? The Gypsy's were doing it in the dark ages....

yeah I know it's a stereotype

but I think you get the point.

By the way, the carpetbaggers in the wake of the Civil War were indeed an American original, right? I guess it was them that I was like thinking about in the first place

 ::) Reading your posts, I've been rolling my eyes so much I think I'm going to strain them. Crushed, you say, an opponent that 1) greatly outnumbered Germany, 2) was defending their home terrain, and 3) was properly equipped for winter war? You are so out of it. Are you even aware of how many Germans died during the winter of '41 in the eastern front, just freezing to death? The weather killed as many men as the Soviet bullets. The German soldiers were wearing summer clothing at temperatures -20 to -40 degrees Celsius. Imagine fighting in those conditions.

Hitler thought conquering the USSR would be easy, after he saw how well Finland was able to wage war against them. You are obviously as dumb as he was.

skel - read the whole thread and you'll understand people's posts much better.  : ok:

IQ - so i guess you DID miss the last world cup since you totally ignored my primary comment about outplaying germany. germany won 1-0, but by their own account they were "disgraced" in the match. we also beat a paraguay team that was favored to make it to the final 4, and was a popular pick among all the experts to win it all.

 

what exactly do you mean by your "redneck" comment? what do you think rednecks might do?

Since you felt free to cut out the first part of my statement allow me to stick it back in there mmmkay?

Yes but if Germany wasn't already fighting the United States, England, and others on the western front the Nazi's would have absolutely crushed the Russian army.

My point is the Nazi war machine was so extensive that, despite whatever obstacles you listed above, it would have simply overwhelmed the Russians had it been a one-front war.

Of course this is all hypothetical in the end...

Just as are the chances of you actually posting without coming across as a grade-A prick.? :P

You're as predictable as they come.

You are just mad because I showed your ass on another thread....as usual.

While I'm not even sure what you're talking about in regards to Ron Silver, exactly what "right wing political agenda" did Mel Gibson have?  Since Gibson is against the war in Iraq (like yourself), I have to assume you must be talking about something else.  Is it The Passion of the Christ?  By all means clarify...

Read the paper.

While I am the last person to believe the U.S. should base it's policy on what the rest of the world thinks, I would say your assumptions that everyone outside America agrees with your point of view might be a bit of a stretch. 

Not saying all, but most are against the war. Yup. Face it, the world does not revolve around us, and the world is not supporting our imperial moves.

I dont know when Gibson ever said anything political regarding our leaders or our war.

I did not say he did.

? He received more shit for that movie than anyone.

He has become the Christian right wing poster boy because of that movie.


Dont watch these shows much.? Sorry.? Instead of refuting the comments, you call us followers.

You are a non-thinker and a follower.

However I refute comments, give sources, and when I do, people tell me "they don't have time" to argue with me. Then, like the true cowards they are, change their user IDs just so they can slam me.


He never said "evil."? He is just simply pointing out the unrefuted fact that 90% of hollywood are liberal.

Source? (no right wing rags either)

You dont think that is portrayed at all in movies?

How?

 I dont think we should change our laws to accomodate what other people think our laws should be.?

People outside America are uninformed about our issues? hahaha!!

How about here for starters.

Change what laws? What are you talking about?

But it doesnt suprise me, like most liberals at University campuses, that you want the Conservatives to go away so that you can have a board full of like minded people so that you are never criticized and that you can pat each other in the ass

No, it just seems that you can't take another opinion, maybe it would be easier over there?

Really, looking at your post is nothing but venom towards me. You aren't really proving anything. Except that you changed your mind about discussing these types of topics.

Sorry, I dont have anything against you personally.  In fact, Im sure you would be a cool guy in a face to face meeting.  I can take another opinion, that is why I like discussing this stuff on these boards.  I would have never began posting in these threads if I couldnt stand a difference of opinion.  I quit posting for a while because I got bored.  I got tired of talking about the 2000 Florida election, defending Bush against attacks that he went to war for oil, and discussing whether or not we should have went to war in Iraq.  These topics got old.  And whenever we talk about politics these are the things that always get rebrought up and rediscussed in almost every thread.  I also thought it was ridiculous that someone on this board called me a racist because I pointed out that illegal immigration causes an increase in crime.  These discussions simply becamse a waste of time and I didnt enjoy them as much as I once did.

Sorry, I dont have anything against you personally.  In fact, Im sure you would be a cool guy in a face to face meeting.

I am the coolest guy I know. If you are in Florida you can come swimming in my pool. Hell, I'll even let you use my towel!

I also thought it was ridiculous that someone on this board called me a racist because I pointed out that illegal immigration causes an increase in crime.

You don't think I have people say stupid shit to me? Not you, but others that agree with you, say fuckin' crazy shit to me.

But my post was a reply to that whole sentence, I just cut out the first part to make it cleaner and easier to read. Because you felt the need to say the same shit twice in a row, I thought everyone already got it.


You're not giving many reasons as to why the things I said wouldn't've been crucial to the end result. Yes, the Wehrmacht was extensive, but you can't just say that to argue everything and anything. In the summer of '41 Germany attacked Russia, thinking they could conquer the land in three weeks. They were able to focus on the eastern front very well at that time, since there was nothing acute going on elsewhere. Yet, they failed to reach Moscow (partly because of Hitler's great idea to turn south), and as soon as the winter started, they were fucked. Not much overwhelming happening on the German side. It was a desperate situation, and would've been one even if Germany had been at peace with the US.


Yes, but it would still make good discussion - assuming both parties knew what they were talking about ;)


Back at ya, mate - I suggest you take a look in the mirror. Do you honestly think your own posts have no effect on the replies you get? Or are you just venting your spleen because I proved you wrong?

the entire sentence would have been

Maybe an American redneck mob would chase you down the street if you mentioned you're European.

before you get excited: I exaggerated this point as I am referring to these rather common outbursts of public anger that redneck Americans (note: I said "redneck" Americans, not all of them) seem to experience as soon as somebody doesn't share their point of view

some of these can be found in the Jane Fonda thread on this very board, others would be the public torching of Dixie Chicks records (come on! This was ridiculous) and the bullying of exchange students coming from countries that didn't support the war

Yes, the carpetbaggers were a true American Original...at least as far as I know...

The whole "Traveling Salesman"/"Door to door salesman" gig was, I think, if not an American invention, certainly more widely done here in the states.

In Europe, the "door to door" thing was more prominent in the service industry (chimney sweeps, etc).

so basically, if an american has different views from yourself, they're rednecks?  ::)

it's interesting how so many liberals play right into the stereo type of an "elitist". so many of you have the attitude that  if someone has a different opinion from yourself, they're either brainwashed, a redneck, ect.

If we are rednecks for for saying it is wrong to go ober the enemies side and give them your support when your country is at war with them, so be it.

The Dixie Chicks played country music.? Their audience is conservative.? I dont know why they thought they could rip on those that buy their albums, and have no consequences from that.? If I was a rap artists and I started making fun of all of the prominent black leaders, Im sure it might have an effect on my sales.? The fact is people get turned off by artists that try to push their views on their audience.? Especially since most of the people that do it didnt even graduate high school.

However, all you look at is the fact that Americans are disagreeing with viewpoints that you find pretty convincing.  Thus, you call them rednecks to try and degrade them so that their points are not listened to.  Its no different than if I started calling people that agreed with Chirac or were against the war dirty Europeans or some other phrase. 

I don't really bother about these definition things, whether I'm an "elitist liberal" (I hope I'm not) or they're "rednecks" (by the way, I like Lynyrd Skynyrd a lot)

The fact is that their actions show who they are. Do you think that dancing around a bonfire of cd's is an expression of political "points of view"? The only thing that I could draw from that is that they're behaving like kindergarten children

and there's a striking coincidence to those Arabs dancing around burning flags during their demonstrations. The only difference is that the "rednecks" live in a thoroughly free and democratic country (as I said before, no doubt about that) whereas the Arabs live in a totalitarian medieval towelheadocracy

so we've kind of come full circle here --- what's the difference?

You seem to be rather partisan in your definition of what counts as a political point of view.  How is what they did any less of an example of using political speech.  You just agree with the view point of one and not the other.  I doubt you criticize those ant-war protesters american protesters that do much more ridiculous things.

Didnt Tyrod get banned for using the same term?

I believe he called them smelly to boot.

Thanks for pointing that out, this guy better change his words in future posts or the same will happen.



/jarmo

Bringing us back to the topic that we have here, people hate america because it's fear. If the Arab people had enough fire power to go to war with America and the world knew this openly, they wouldnt resor to terrorism.

Sorry. No harm intended. It's just us rednecks talks like that.


well you obviously read all through my post but you seem to have missed me saying that in my personal opinion the other guys are just as ridiculous. Why don't they just write a letter to the editor? That wouldn't make them look like a bunch of fools

What if writing a letter to the editor doesnt get you noticed?  These people are protesting to get notice, and this notion of political protest is at the heart of our system.  I agree though, it might not be way to get my message out, but it is effective to a certain extent.

Give me a break, are you talking about the squabble whether Christians believed in reincarnatinon???

Let's quickly review here:

1. You made the blanket statement that early Christians believed in reincarnation.
2. I said that they did not.
3. Again, you simply said that they did.
4. I realized you and I were talking about two different things.? You were referring to individual Christians who, for the record, may have believed and practiced any number of things.? I was referring to Christianity itself.

I'm not exactly sure how you "showed my ass" in that debate but think whatever you want.  And that, after all, is just it isn't it?

I can picture you with a pencil and pad next to your computer, jotting a mark down everytime you believe you've "won" some debate or discussion.? I've never come across anyone on this board that seems to garner such self-satisfaction from how well they feel they've come off in an argument.

Honestly, I feel sorry for your wife.? You must be utter hell to live with.? ?:P

You are a couple beers short of a six pack. You cling to what you wished happend, instead of what was written. It's all there in black and white.

Go re-read the post.

If you can't see it, that's ok, everybody else here can.

They also see you are a true nut-job.

Remind me of Tyrod.....