I'm not sure that everybody would've missed the irony in substituting "outstanding citizens" for "scumbags". It might've generated some discussion as people asked for clarification, since an accusation of treason is inconsistent with being an outstanding citizen. But I do see your point about lowering the level of animosity by removing one of the insults from the sentence.
The other thing about the statement in context, now that I look at it again, is that, by analogy, he was calling Iranian dissidents "scumbags" for preaching treason against their government. Even changing the name to "outstanding citizens" doesn't fully resolve the conflict, since "treason" has such negative connotations.
It's ironic, in retrospect, how close he came to expressing the true nature of the opposition by many Americans: It's a profound loyalty to America, just as much as an Iranian wanting to change his country for the better. Iranian dissidents and America's loyal opposition share the same desire for what's best for our countries, and a determination to bring about necessary change to correct the problems we see.
Gary and Mark came so close to understanding...but choked it.
As we fight over the word "treason", it's easy to lose sight of what motivates me. I look at Bush's policies and see them as wrong-headed, and extrapolate that the consequences will be mostly negative. I see America bogged down in a perpetual war with no vision of victory or how to make it happen. I see America becoming more isolated in the world, meeting more and more resistance to our initiatives. I see America's basic noble message of freedom and hope lost behind the perception that we're actually just another wannabe empire. I see former allies forming their own coalitions to oppose us, or, in a replay of the Cold War, being driven into the fold of an opponent like China. I see the possibility that our illusion of invincibility could be punctured if we force enough of the countries individually unable to oppose us, into coalitions able to muster the military (and economic) power to put up genuine resistance.
At the same time, at home, I see us losing our civil liberties in the name of national security. I see our culture warped into a perpetual siege mentality, hunkered down behind our fortress walls staring out in suspicion and fear at the rest of the world. I see many of our best and brightest emigrating to nations not crippled by such a toxic culture. I see our economy both burdened by a huge war machine, and shrinking as business fleeing overseas to avoid that burden and the general malaise of our culture; I see the beginning of a downard economic spiral.
This could turn out very badly for America, and I do not want that happen.
How in the world can that be construed as treason?
Flame » in reply to re: That's actually interesting
Interesting
The whole thread (148 posts)
- JFC can't we just get along....
- Apparently not (n/t)
- The thread is now locked
- Thank you.
- Uh Frank This Is Flame
- Uh Mark
- Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position
- Point by point
- MA Wins Again
- re: MA Wins Again
- There You Go Again
- Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- Aye, there's the rub
- Hello
- I say again: Put up, or shut up.
- Sort of A good Point
- That being the case
- On the WMD Issue
- In The Interest Of Time - Blood For Oil (n/t)
- re: That being the case
- That being the case
- Sort of A good Point
- I say again: Put up, or shut up.
- Well said (n/t)
- Hello
- re: Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- Aye, there's the rub
- re: There You Go Again
- Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- There You Go Again
- re: MA Wins Again
- MA Wins Again
- "3) Providing aid and comfort to the enemy has nothing to do with treason and no reasonable person would think otherwise."
- Do you speak for all conservatives?
- Hell No
- around and around and around and around
- re: "Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position "
- OK It Is The Conservative Position
- OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- The Summary You Ignored
- Restriction of Speech
- Yes You've Got It Wrong
- As, apparently do you
- Why Do You People Ignore Half Of What I've Posted To Make Your Points?
- Wow
- Battle Fatigue?
- Scarred, battered, but unbowed
- Robert did not make a mistake, you did in misunderstanding him.
- We Both Did According To This
- That would be the apology and pledge I referred to. I could not have made my post much simpler. (n/t)
- We Both Did According To This
- Battle Fatigue?
- You people?
- Wow
- Why Do You People Ignore Half Of What I've Posted To Make Your Points?
- As, apparently do you
- Yes You've Got It Wrong
- And Ignored Again (n/t)
- Restriction of Speech
- I see The Plea For Consistency Once Again Falls On Deaf Ears
- re: OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- The Summary You Ignored
- OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- OK It Is The Conservative Position
- Hell No
- Delete Post Or Modify Name
- Point by point
- Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position
- This Is Flame
- Picking at scabs
- Uh Mark
- It isn't serious, is it FrankC -
- Is this one about me? (n/t)
