In dealing with inter-personal relationships in the world, we need to see people as people in order to value them. When leaders such as Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank and others speaks of “dissenters, astro-turf, ring-wing extremists, Swastika-carrying tea-baggers” and such, it is an attempt to distance themselves from the other's humanity. They does not see the faces of Americans who love their country and do not want to see it destroyed, they sees an impersonal group, a faceless mass of opponents to their agenda.
As such, they feel no connection with them as people and it is far easier to find distaste and mistrust for a faceless group of protesters than it is real Americans with real faces, real stories, sincere beliefs and ideals.
Until our leaders see the people whom them wish to marginalize and discredit as real people with valid points of view, they will never be able to connect with them or even to care about what they think or want.
During our country’s history of war participation, one constant seems to run through them all, the labels we give our enemies. In WWII we fought the “Nips”, “Jerries” “Krauts”, “Japs” and the “Whops”. In Vietnam it was “Charley”, “Gooks”, “tunnel rats” and “Coolies”. In the Middle-East we fight the “Rag-heads”, “Camel-jockeys”, “insurgents”, or faceless “terrorists”. All these labels serve one purpose, to distance us from their humanity. In wartime that may even be necessary for us to rationalize the killing of another human being.
It is easier to conduct a campaign of warfare against a faceless enemy once we can imagine them as being anything other than human beings with dreams, hopes, families, beliefs, albeit different than ours. That distance is necessary for us to have in order to combat them effectively without allowing it to get too deeply into our hearts as fellow human beings.
So in Washington, as in the rest of the world, we need to find a way to reconnect with those different than us as human beings, and as valid occupants on this planet, and in this country.
In these days it is so easy to find oneself called a jingoist or a racist as a way to be dismissed from making any valid contribution to the issue being discussed. Make a statement against the influx of illegal immigrants into America and see what I mean.
Being called a “flat-earther” is a means by which one opposed to the eroding Al Gore concept of Climate Change is silenced. Being called a “Birther” is a way to silence those who question President Obama’s eligibility to serve as president rather than address it.
If you recognize the threat that Islam militants pose this country you are labeled as Islamophobic. If you don’t think gay marriage should be allowed, you are instantly labeled as homophobic. “Right-wing talk radio” is a way to show disdain for the views broadcast there. The list is almost endless but the desired effect is the same, to negate any contribution one may have to an issue.
That doesn’t mean that we to allow tolerance to overrule common sense or the need to recognize true dangers. We need to remember however that were it not for our personal upbringing and cultural differences between where we were born and where “they” began their life, we could very well be just like “them”, especially from a global perspective. That realization is important in understanding and dealing with differences, little or great, between people from all walks of life and all belief systems.
So every time you hear someone use labels to differentiate between themselves and someone else, recognize that they are seeking to distance themselves from that person for one reason or another. In some cases that might be desirable to call someone for what they are as a matter of survival, for example not being afraid to call a convicted rapist or child molester what they have proven themselves to be. It is in that context that we can exercise due caution and protect our families and ourselves. But in other instances it may be merely a means not to have to deal with them. And these are the instances I am referring to here.
There are many issues that need to be addressed in this country today which will not ever be totally and honestly dealt with because of the labels tacked onto those with opposing views. Political Correctness is a insidious disease in this country and it destroys all legitimate debate about a great many issues. Valid and pertinent facts are ignored due to Political Correctness. And such willful blindness is detrimental in our solving these problems and even to our continued development as human beings. It leaves us in the darkness and leads us away from the truth.
The extreme differences between some individuals may make it necessary to mark those differences. There will always be conservatives and liberals, morality and immorality and right and wrong and no erasing of those titles will ever bring us all together on the same page. Yet it is still important to understand that unless we see each other as human beings and not merely nameless “others” we will never cross the divide that separates us and that is a struggle we must never cease to engage in. Bridging those differences is a terrific challenge, one that I find myself often right in the middle of, but a necessary one nevertheless.
As long as there is a “us” and “them” we need to continue to build the bridges upon we can meet, share idea and maybe even find the similarities while working on the differences. After all, it is what civilized human beings do.



posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by ChelseaLad
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
Clay, as far as labeling you a liberal, it is difficult to see you as anything but when he defends the actions of Carter and Obama, two very misguided liberals. I suppose it is unfair to label Obama liberal in some minds too in spite of the fact that he is even too liberal for some liberals. You may call yourself a Republican but there is a point when you get too far away from an ideal or platform that you fall off it.
You can tell people by their fruits, or as Obama himself stated during the campaign, "The acorn doesn't fall too far from the tree". Funny he should word it that way but he just loves ACORN so I guess it makes sense.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
You implied that Carter WANTED to destroy America, that Obama WANTS to turn us into a Third World nation. And I asked: do you think these men WANTED to do these things? Motivations, not actions. Please stop misquoting me.
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
As president he offered to the world the weakest America they had seen. Iran thumbed their noses at us and knew they could get away with it because the peanut farmer had neither the courage nor the resolve to confront them. So we had our embassy stormed and Americans taken prisoner for 444 days. Iran would not respond to a weak president and only released the hostages the very day that Ronald Reagan was elected president. Why? Because they knew he wouldn’t take their crap. Carter was a weak president militarily and a terrible president as far as the economy was concerned. Remember the gas lines and sky-high unemployment? We are headed there again.
I am sure that Carter did not wake up every morning and ask, “What can I do to destroy the sovereignty and economy and reputation of the United States today?” But his ignorance has the same result.
His continued meddling in foreign affairs without the sanction of the United States government is probably illegal due to the Logan Act but at worst it shows his naiveté, something that he shares with the present Commander-in-Chief. Both of them figure they can appease Iran and Russia, North Korea and anyone else who harbors us ill will and they will immediately begin to play nice. Obama made concessions to Russia in hopes that they would reciprocate only to see them reverse their decision. Obama holds no power of influence over them. His silver-tongue rhetoric means nothing to them. He is eroding the image of the U.S. around the globe with his nonsense.
Is he trying to destroy America by conscious thought and action? Well, based upon his own words I believe he is. Remember his statement less than a week before the election last year when he boasted, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America”? To change the fundaments upon which this country was established is to destroy what we are built upon. There is no spin here, only the willful neglect to take him at his word.
Carter was the most inept president we ever had. Obama is much more refined and slick, but much more devious. He wants to ignore the Constitution and the intent of the founding fathers and change it to fit his view of what HE thinks America needs to be. The Constitution to him is a “living document” capable of changing to meet the fickleness of society. Our foundation cannot be changed at the whim of any politician.
Obama is surrounding himself with men and women who praise openly the influence and actions of Chairman Mao, Chavez, and Fidel Casto. Communist leaders admired by Obama appointees and by Democrats on the hill? It is absurd.
What kind of America is he wanting us to become with such people in his administration? Certainly not ones who wish to preserve the Union but rather to destroy it and then to rebuild it in the image they think it should be reshaped into. “Not put a band aid on the system but to change the system” shouted Van Jones, a radical ex-con and advocate of a cop-murderer whose socialistic brand of beliefs are far from those of what America stands for. He called himself a Communist and yet Obama’s White House was so “proud to have recruited him”, according to Valerie Jarrett, the closest person to Obama and who says he is like a brother to her.
If anyone cannot see the motives of these men as detrimental to the health of America, then they have greater problems than dealing with me and my beliefs.
Obama travels the globe apologizing for America. He says we should feel guilty for wanting to drive SUVs and keep our temperature set at 72 degrees. He say that can’t expect the rest of the world to like it. Frankly I don’t care what the rest of the world likes or dislikes. Their civilization is thousands of years older than ours and they still live in dirt and poverty and they think our system needs changing! Our system of government has allowed us to create this America of bountiful blessings and to here our president apologize for it makes me sick to my stomach.
I am through defending America to people who think Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama have America’s interest at heart when they promote the socialistic policies they seek to implement. The facts speak for themselves and while some would rather focus on me than on the problems being forced upon this country, it is but a distraction and a game I refuse to play any longer. Enjoy your perception of our mighty leader if you please. The company you keep is dwindling more day by day.
Today’s passage of the health care bill proposed by Pelosi, Obama and company is another fact that proves my point. The face of America is changing and soon it will not be America any longer. Mark my word. Mark your calendar and remember you were duly warned.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Guess what, my friend--the Constitution IS a living document. The Bill of Rights were the first few AMENDMENTS to the Constitution. The power of women to vote would never have happened, had the Constitution not been amendable. And we are not the slave-owning society we were when we got started, thank Goodness.
You want to talk about someone who REALLY ignored the Constitution? How about the man who gave the word Rendition, and the locale Guantánamo, a sinister flavor? And, no, I'm not talking about George W. Bush. W. is a mere pawn in this man's game.
From nine years ago, to less than one year ago, there has been outrageous flouting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. But that may not bother you, unless and until someone taps YOUR phone, or tries to peek into YOUR internet searches, without a warrant--or takes away YOUR brother/father/son to a country where they waterboard, and worse, without conscience.
The truth is, I don't think Jimmy Carter was a suitable President. But his ineptitude did not stem from the malicious intent that your words imparted to him. Part of what made him inept was unrealistic optimism. He had more faith in the persuasive strength of his ideals than he ought to have. He does not deserve your impugning words.
And on October 11, 2002, the Nobel committee demonstrated that.
I hope you will take the best part of your own advice in this blog entry. Ditch your labels--stop UsVsThemming your world view--work to reduce the distances. You will be better for it, mark my word.
Peace out,
Mr. Please-Don't-Label-Me
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
Al Gore was given it in 2007 "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.’ British courts proved there were 9 blatant errors or misrepresentations made by Gore that kept the movie from being viewed in schools. His “The debate s over” ploy denies any opposition to his unscientific and misleading crap. He has gotten rich off his garbage while hundreds of REAL scientists are exposing his goal of simply being a “distribution of wealth” hoax.
The United Nations received it in 2001 "for their work for a better organized and more peaceful world". The UN is an organization which embraces terrorist countries and Islamic extremist countries and has promoted its own agenda which is not always humane in its efforts.
Jimmy Carter in 2002 "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development”. His racism and his anti-Israeli comments and attitudes make him a questionable choice.
Basically the Nobel Peace Prize is given to real leaders who deserve it but to cite that Carter or Obama received the NPP as a validation of their leadership qualities is shallow.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
How do YOU feel, when somebody ignores the many valid things you say, and latches onto the one arguably weak point, like a leech on an udder?
Marginalized? Demonized?
I'm not going to call you a Spin Doctor. That would be labeling. But I would urge readers to reread my comment, and your response, with an eye to noting those things I said that you chose to ignore, e.g. waterboarding, rendition, Constitution, etc.
"Reducing the Distances Between Us"--your title becomes increasingly ironic.
Write in Guestbook
posted by govwatcher
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
*****
And one of Zubydah's interrogators, former FBI special agent Ali Soufan, told a Senate hearing in May that waterboarding him was unnecessary. Any useful information interrogators got from him either was or could have been produced without "enhanced" techniques, he said.
Soufan said Zubaydah stopped talking after CIA contractors took over and began using harsh techniques, which he testified were "ineffective, slow and unreliable, and harmful to our efforts to defeat al Qaeda."
*****
The full article may be found here:
view link
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
s treating prisoners badly or harshly a good thing. I don't think so. Is giving them rights due only American citizens, and babying them in prison hoping that they'll break under the pressure of being coddled a good thing. I don't think so either.
And if you want me to agree with prisoners accused of the deaths or attempted murder of Americans that they are being mistreated, don't hold your breath. Terrorists kill without regret or remorse and every one of them feels they are being maligned because of their "beliefs". Boo Hoo! Cry me a river. They are prisoners of war, enemies of the state, so don't expect me to feel sorry for them. And the administration of Barack Obama who is too cowardly to ever call them terrorists is sickening.
Making a speech as we remembered the 3,000 that died at the hands of terrorists, Muslim terrorists to be perfectly clear about it, Obama didn't have the balls to even mention the word "terror" or terrorist". He slighted every American that felt pain that day and for the families that lost loved ones, he spit in their face. A "Day of Service"? What an embarrassment.
A Commander-in-Chief that hasn't the nerve to fight or do what is necessary to protect the country he has sworn to protect, is a disgrace and a joke, and treasonous to boot.
If you ask me about hooking a terrorist up to a car battery to get pertinent information that will save American lives, I have one thing to say.... "Red is positive and black is negative.... Clear!"
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
In the more specific sense, we tend to refer to terrorists following our experiences even before 9/11 as individuals who use terror to promote their ideology and to further their political agenda. I could say religious agenda also since in Islam there is not separation of church and state. Islam is both political and religious. They are one to true believers.
Understanding Islamic terrorists requires very little analysis. Islam may be called a “Religion of Peace” by the politically correct crowd, but the Muslim leaders who tend to influence the actions of Muslims are more intend in promoting jihad than love, peace and understanding.
Not all Muslims condone such acts as we saw in Fort Hood a few days ago, or the bombing of the Twin Towers in 1993 or their destruction in 2001, or the over 9,000 acts of terror around the world since 9/11. But a significant number are to be included in that group.
By the Muslim community’s own estimates, between 15 and 25% of the Muslim population either are actively engaged in terrorism or feel it is a valid means by which to deal with those that oppose Islam. That “small number” as Obama loves to refer to the radicals equals 300 million Muslims, a number equal to every man, woman or child in America. If that doesn’t wake people up I don’t know what will.
We are reminded almost every day of the goal of Islam, that of seeing every country in the world under Sharia Law and obeying the course Muhammad and Allah set for them. The means by which they promote that agenda is through high population growth so their goals can be advanced through sheer numbers. It is also promoted through political influence once their numbers begin to grow. (Ask England how that has worked for them.)
And they promote it through jihad, not the “inner struggle” as Islamic apologists try to proclaim but through open warfare against unbelievers. When questioned as to why peaceful co-existence with other faiths is not preached, Omar Abdel Rahman, known as the blind sheik, replied to a class full of students at Al-Azhar University in Egypt, the largest Islamic university in the world. His words are warnings to those who wish to minimize the teachings of jihad. He said, “There is a whole surah (a chapter) called ‘Spoils of War’. There is no surah called “Peace” Jihad and killing are the head of Islam. If you take them out, you cut off the head of Islam”.
Jihad is not the inner struggle with an outward fight for global domination and with an “army” of 300 million believing that way. It is only our foolishness and our bowing at the altar of Political Correctness that causes us to hear such words and dismiss them as unimportant or merely the rants of a disillusioned madman. They are a warning and a call to terror. Any other message that we may wish to glean from them only serves to feed our own delusion.
Acts of violence to promote jihad whether by a lone murderer as happened at Fort Hood or by an organized effort as was exhibited on 9/11/01 are acts of terrorism, the cowardly attempts of some to dismiss them as less not withstanding.
You may argue that what the guards do at Gitmo serves as terrorist acts too, but that label was attached to soldiers who simply allowed a caterpillar into the cell of a Muslim who didn’t like bugs. Give me a break. These men know what terror is. They are practiced at the art and a wonderful manipulators of the system and a gullible liberal government.
The Culture and Media Institute released yesterday some interesting findings. It has been reported that of the news reports on the Fort Hood shooting incident:
1. 85% of the stories did not mention the word “terror” at all
2. There were only 7 terrorism references in a total of 48 reports
3. Only 29% of stories mentioned Hasan is a Muslim
4. Of those who did mention that he was a Muslim, 50% defended Islam
So it is safe to say that the American press is too wed to political correctness to call this danger what it is, and in half the cases when they did find the courage, they even defended Islam. Propaganda espoused by groups such as CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood is taking hold as Islam has become the greatest threat to the security of America. If we lose this fight nothing else matters.
And with a president who cannot stomach the idea that Islamic terrorist exist much less are a threat to America, we are in for a rude awakening.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
There's also a huge difference, Bluesman07, between your sentiments and the Geneva Convention.
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
All we need now is a man as president that realizes we are indeed at war. His appeasement to Muslims at every turn, his apologizing for America and his praise of Islam and of Muslim influence in Amercia as he embarrassingly proclaimed in Turkey, proves he neither has the intelligence, experience, not the guts it takes to lead this country. He doesn't want to lead it just change it to meet his twisted views of what he thinks it should be.
Had any other president catered and pandered to an enemy in a time of war and he would be impeached and tried for treason. The spell he has this country under is rapidly beginning to break.
A Commander-in-Cheif that denies we are at war, who voted to defund the Iraqi war, who can't find the balls to support our troops in Afghanistan except with another patronizing speech, and shows his obesience by bowing to a Saudi king is a man who took on a job he isn't qualified to do.
He hasn't even led a Boy Scout troop on a campout but he thinks he is qualified to run a country and lead an army! His rapid decline is unprecidented in U.S. history as the country begins to see his ineptness to do anything that doesn't involve a teleprompter and a cheering crowd.
We are at war and peacetime rules don't apply.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
Your denial isn't helping either. So be it. I feel like I am trying to discuss things with a drunk who hasn't a clue. Find some other way to spend your time. I am done here. There are more intelligent people out there to converse with.
And by the way, painting America as a "leading terrorist nation" as some have because of Gitmo, and people who love to find fault with this country doesn't do anything to restore her honor either. Maybe you could write Obama's apologetic speeches for him.
I guess you love the UN too and think as some of Obama's appointees do that we should consult the UN to make our laws and decide how to act and how to deal with other nations.
Have another drink of Kool-Aid.
Write in Guestbook
posted by claybo
I'm a loyal American, as anyone who knows me will tell you. Being anti-torture does not make someone unAmerican. I thought readers would benefit from a two-sided discussion. But, as you state, you are not interested in further discussion.
Here's more information about Gitmo: view link
Good luck in your future endeavors. Please don't ever stoop to torture. You're an American; you're better than that.
Write in Guestbook
posted by Bluesman07
This is an insult to America and especially those with family members and friends in the ground today because of this act of war.
Our president is a fool and anyone who cannot see that he is systematically dismantling America economically, politically, and even throwing out common sense, has a problem seeing reality.
In his desire for "justice" he is showing contempt for America herself. And what do you think will happen if they, because of the limits of the civilian court in trying military matters, they are found not-guilty?
Maybe you will be happy when the case against them is dismissed because people like you think it is inadmissible because of the method in which it was gathered. Confessions could even be thrown out and they could walk. I guess that is the justice for Americans that you want but I think you are in the minority.
Never before have war criminals been tried with an umbrella of protection and rights over them given by the country they attacked. Shameful and without defense by any American seeking justice.
This administration gets worse every day. How much will we take? We will see and it may not be long in coming.
This callous act of bringing them to New York is more torturous than anything done at Gitmo, but it is the America people who are being violated. Again.
Write in Guestbook