From: Platt Holden (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Sep 26 2005 - 14:06:40 BST
> [Arlo previously, for the record]
> You defined a "patriot" as such: "Patriot" as defined by Merriam Webster:
> "one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and
> interests." Those characters fail to meet the definition, especially in
> regards to elected "authority." To them, whatever is wrong in the world is
> America's fault.
> [Arlo pointed out that this definition made Limbaugh "unpatriotic" for his
> dissent about every action undertaken by the Clinton regime]
> He did not blame Clinton and America for all the world's problems in the
> same way as Chomsky, Moore, Mother Cynthia and that crowd blame Bush and
> America. But when Clinton committed perjury, the patriotic thing to do was
> impeach him.
> You changed the criteria again, how odd.
> Maybe you can tell me one definition of "patriot" that you'd like me to
> apply equally to "liberals" and "conservatives"?
I'll stick with dictionary definition. I find that Limbaugh "supports" the
U.S. will Chomsky and his crowd don't.
> [Arlo previously]
> But here you tread into interesting territory. "Leading protests" against
> actions you government undertakes, that YOU find IMMORAL, is a being a
> [Platt had responded]
> No. That to give aid and comfort to the nation's enemies is traitorous.
> Check Article 3, Section 3 of our Constitution.
> [Arlo had replied]
> You said: I don't recall Limbaugh **leading protests** or giving aid and
> comfort to the enemy when Clinton sent American troops to Haiti and
> Kosovo, or when he bombed Iraq.
> So again, I ask, what is the difference between "leading protests" and
> "speaking out on a national radio program" with a stance of dissent from
> White House policies?
> You want to compare Mother Cynthia with Rush Limbaugh? She could no
> more fill three hours of talk radio than fly to the moon, much less hold an
> audience of millions.
> So the difference is... popularity? If you "lead protests" in dissent
> you're unpatriotic, if you host a national radio program in dissent you are
> a "patriot". Is that it?
No. The difference is recognition of America's values that are worth fighting for.
> Once again, Platt, the only difference I can see is that when a
> conservative dissents from a liberal president, he is a "patriot", and when
> a liberal dissents from a conservative president, he is "unpatriotic".
> You've not said, or offered, anything to show otherwise.
> Once Congress has committed the country to war, I think it's the duty of
> the citizens to support the troops and not undermine their efforts with a
> constant barrage of criticism.
> So the highest source of morality we answer to is Congress?
When it comes to committing the nation to war, who else his higher moral
authority? You perhaps?
> [Arlo previously]
> Which completely avoids the challenge. Can you name me any instance where
> you felt republican dissent was un-patriotic, or where you feel democratic
> dissent was patriotic?
> Sure. Democrats like Senator Lieberman of Connecticut who spoke out
> against Clinton's White House sexcapades was being patriotic. Republicans
> critical of the Bush Administration's refusal to stop illegal immigration
> are being patriotic.
> First, you've only answered half the question (both examples you shown you
> call "patriotic", you still need an example of a republican whose dissent
> to a liberal president was unpatriotic).
Why do I need such an example?
> Second, even your first example ignores the spirit of the challenge. I was
> remiss in retyping it, so I'll ask anew, show me an example where a
> democrat's dissent of a republican president is "patriotic"?aitor.
Again, why do I need such an example?
> There are times, sadly, when the cliche "I've seen the enemy, and he is us"
> must be dealt with. To think otherwise is to blindly support social
> patterns over everything else.
> You won't find me blindly supporting social patterns like liberal welfare
> programs like you do. But when our soldiers are put at risk by duly
> constituted democratic authority, I'll support them 100 percent. Finally,
> if you know of a better country than America, why not go there? Take about
> being a hypocrite!
> First, I never said I didn't like America. You always miss this key
> distinction. Being critical of the government, republican or democrat, is
> patriotic. Demanding reform to things you see as immoral is patriotic.
So if I'm critical of government I'm being patriotic. If I support the government,
I'm unpatriotic. Is that it? Or everybody is a patriot, no matter what?
> Second, I have lived overseas before, and when my daughter is finished high
> school will likely return (or move somewhere). Not out of dislike for
> "America", but out of a desire to see and experience more of the world that
> our little continent.
> Third, but you admit you blindly support the government's decision to
> deploy the military. And you assume any dissent is done out of "uncaring"
> for the soldiers? Is that correct?
Not any dissent, but a constant drumbeat of dissent that gives aid and
comfort to the enemy.Those who march around with placards saying "Bush is
Hitler" might as well join the terrorists if that's what they really
believe. Talk about hypocrisy!
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 26 2005 - 14:08:23 BST