Denver residents received a shock when Mayor John Hickenlooper's annual State of the City address was opened by Jazz Singer Rene Marie singing "Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing," also known as the "Black National Anthem," instead of the traditional "Star Spangled Banner."
Apprently no one had an inkling that she was going to substitute it for America's National Anthem.
Governor Bill Ritter labeled it as "inappropriate." City Councilman Charlie Brown said, "There is no substitute for the national anthem, period." Mayor Hickenlooper said he was disappointed and confused.
Marie later said she kept her plans on substituting th song between her and her husband and originally planned on mixing the words of the two songs. She said, "When I decided to sing my version, what was going on in my head was: 'I want to express how I feel about living in the United States, as a black woman, as a black person.'"
She stated if she had it to do over again, she would do the same, as she also said she would not apologize for the substitution.
Report here along with lyrics to "Lift Ev'ry Voice & Sing"
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Star Spangled Banner Replaced By "Black National Anthem"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
76 comments:
So what.
yea Jonny,
I see your point.
Did move me at all.
But I did really like the words to the song she choose.
So, if someone is hired to sing a particular song, substituting another, without letting anyone know, is acceptable?
Would it be as acceptable if Ted Nugent was invited to sing a song at an NAACP gathering and substituted Dixie instead?
There are lots of beautiful music out there, but only one National Anthem, the Star Spangled Banner.
I wouldn't dought that this terrible singer just became Proud of her country for the first time in her life and probably gets an invite to shred the National Anthem once again at the DNC convention in August.
Yes, the words she sang were very nice, Eileen. No one's saying that her song was offensive or bad-sounding or anything like that; in fact, it's a nice piece of music and, based on a recording that Victoria's substitute this week (I think his name is Chris Crock, excuse any wrong spelling) played, the woman is gifted with a gorgeous voice.
The problem, as I see it, is twofold. First, she knew very well that she was being invited for the purpose of singing the Star-Spangled Banner and she chose to decieve the people who invited her. She could have elected to give the city council and mayor a heads-up even if she was planning to do the same song. She could have politely requested permission to sing her preferred song. There are a whole host of things she could have done that would have been more honest and respectful but she chose to conceal her intentions and rely on the basic decency of others to ensure that she wouldn't be interrupted by someone reminding her that she was invited to sing the American National Anthem, not the "national anthem" (which is a bizarre thing to call the anthem of a group that, by no stretch of the imagination, is itself a nation) of a racial minority in America.
Secondly, it personally bothers me on a basic level that someone would substitute something else for The Star-Spangled Banner. For me, the national anthem has more significance than lovely words and music (although it has both of those as well). It signifies a celebration of one of the two significant events of the War of 1812. It's a piece of our nation's history, our ENTIRE nation's history, not just that of a segment of our nation. "Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing" has its place and it's a nice song. However, it isn't our national anthem and its place is not a venue where the singer was invited for the sole purpose of singing a specific song.
That the lady starkly refuses to apologize for her deliberate disrespect and deception speaks very ill of her. That, given the chance, she would do the disrespectful thing twice, exposes a certain contempt towards those who just wanted a beautiful voice like hers to sing a song for their meeting.
Happy 4th of July everyone! In honor of our nations birthday I would like to invite all of you to do something good for our country: VOTE FOR BOB BARR in NOVEMBER!! Yes, in fact all true conservaties realize that John Mccain is much too liberal to be President of the United States of Amertica. Vote for an absolute Conservative in November!
Bob Barr is a former GOP congressman from Georgia. He is running as a libertarian presidential candidate. I will keep you all posted on this, as I will be actively campaigning for MR. BOB BARR!!
http://www.bobbarr2008.com
Well at least Liberal ROSEANNE BARR sang the right Lyrics (how off key she was) to the Star Spangled Banner Vs. this Obama Supporter's Political Unpatriotic Parody.
PS: Bob Barr for Prez, hardly
unless your for Legalizing Pot
and loving Oregons death by Kevorkian. He was all for Terry Schivo dying. Bob Barr was a Lobbyist for the Pot Industry after Georgia through his butt out. No the State of Georgia did a great service for America by putting that clown out to pasture.
But Ralph Naders running.
PPS: RIP JESSE HELMS
PPPS: Happy 4th of July
On June 27:
"This is my Last Post on Victoria's Blogg
Bye KLATU"
Now "Jack" (formerly known as Klatu appears. You did not keep your word Klatu. Why am I not surprised?
One may ask “so what” about an unknown singer singing in Denver? You need look no further than the byline (Lew Waters) who is as predictable and transparent as they come.
Never mind that we have never heard of the singer. Never mind that most of us probably do not know the name of the mayor of Denver or closely follow Denver’s state of the city addresses. How does this story travel beyond the Denver area?
Item 1: The mayor is a Democrat
And where is the Democratic convention being held this year? Denver
Item 2: The singer is black (to remind us her picture was published)
And who is the Democratic nominee: Barack Obama who also is black. Aren’t they all the same? This is an attempt to disparage Obama.
Never mind that Obama has no connection to the singer whatsoever. By once again playing the race card and the patriotic card the feeble minded righties are expected to believe there is a connection.
Expect more of the race card during this election cycle from Lew who along with the other righties are in desperate need of another Willy Horton.
Jesse Helms would have been proud of you Lew.
Interesting Being the Fourth of July(AMERICA'S BIRTHDAY) that Democrat Politicians in Colorado and else where are running from Jazz Singer Rene Marie for her UNPATRIOTIC abuse of the Star Spangled Banner. One of the Best things a SOUND MAN could have done was to turn her MICROPHONE OFF. This episode reminds me of the Time the Congressional Democrats all tried to distance themselves from Michael Newdow for trying to take GOD out of the PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. Un-Patriotic Abuse and wanting to change the USA to the USSA is a very old but obvious and dangerous trend of the American Socialist Left. There should be Penalties for these type's of un-patriotic abuses(FLAG BURNING) is another one. The House on UN-AMERICAN Activities should be reinstated.
Predictable as can be, the moonbats come to cry it is I playing the race card, not a Black person substituting a song known as the "Black" National Anthem over America's National Anthem, without foreknowledge of those who invited her.
Why would she do that? Why not sing the song she was invited to sing, or as was said, let her planned subsitution be know nin advance?
Racially motivated? Quite possible, some feel that way. But, who is really dividing Americans?
Your answer can be found in just who promotes multi-culturalism over Americanism for all.
Then again, Obama is advocating a return to serfdom, just calling it something else.
As I said, predictable as can be.
I wonder if Jazz Singer Rene Marie
was paid $$$$$$$ for this Un-Patriotic abuse of the "Star Spangled Banner. It's probably not to late to "STOP THE CHECK". I wonder if the Democrat Politicians including the Denver Mayor will do this or maybe take Jazz Singer Rene Marie to small Claims court to recover the $$$$$$ she Tricked the Democrat Mayor of Denver out of. But then again maybe these Democrat Politicians really didn't mind this UN-PATRIOTIC abuse of the Star Spangled Banner.
Not only does dishonest Jack_ _ _ (formerly Klatu) post after saying he would not, but then he is deceptive:
"But then again maybe these Democrat Politicians really didn't mind this UN-PATRIOTIC abuse of the Star Spangled Banner"
You should read the news before you blather.
Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. called her actions disrespectful. Democratic Mayor John Hickenlooper accused her of deceiving the city for the purpose of a political statement.
"We all respect artistic license and support freedom of expression," he said. "But in a tradition-laden civic ceremony . . . making a personal substitution for the national anthem was not an option. We asked for 'The Star-Spangled Banner' and that's what we expected."
Even Sen. Barack Obama, campaigning for the presidency this week in Colorado, weighed in.
"We only have one national anthem," Obama told the Rocky Mountain News on Thursday. "And so, if she was asked to sing the national anthem, she should have sung that."
Taylor1 hit the nail on the head when it comes to Lew. His prior postings are enough evidence of his playing the race card. And I expect we will see more, at least until the election.
If someone is hiring me to do a specific job, and I fail to do it, they fire me, don't pay me or whatever.
But I guess this just doesn't phase me at all.
Care factor = 0.
Sorry.
So, channel 9 News in Denver broadcasting this report isn't playing the race card, but by putting it up here, I am, right iago?
Substituting the "Black National Anthem" for America's "Star Spangled Banner" isn't raciallymotivated, but mention of it being done is racially motivated?
What next, anyone not voting for and supporting Obama will be racist as well?
Was it racist of Obama to speak against the action of this singer? Since my making it know is considered racist, why not Obama speaking against it?
Predictable moonbats play the race card or any other card trying to manipulate their way. Sorry, boys it don't work.
Channel 9 News is in Colorado. So was Obama when he made the statement. What is the relevance of the episode for an Oregon blog?
Unfortunately you have a lot of baggage because of your previous posts. This is not an isolated instance for you.
God bless you Lew for your gentlemanly patience. Obviously some will never, ever understand your simple patriotism.
American Socialists Don't Know the Meaning of the Word Patriotism.
Barack Obama has been out trying to Redefine what it means. And now there's a Supporter of Obama's out there trying to re-write the Star Spangled Banner and its Meaning.
The Fourth of July is nothing but a day off to Most American UN-PATRIOTIC Socialists.
I was totally confused by what this woman did. Okay, and who the hell ever heard of a black national anthem???
If this woman did not get permission to sing something other than the national anthem then she shouldn't have sang what ever that song was. By the way, you can not just go around doing what ever you please just because you are black.
How about I sing a Mexican national anthem??? Or how about we have a Vietnamese national anthem, and on and on.
Lets remember who Barbara Jordan was, and remember she said that America should not be made up of subcultures because they divide our country. We should all become acclimated as Americans and accept that we all live here together and be respectful of our combined American culture.
Roger, many don't want to understand it. To them, patriotism is a dirty word.
iago, would you have us reurn to local news event only, ignoring what happens elsewhere? By your reasoning, you should not comment on the War on Terror or President Bush, unless the war is in Oregon or Bush does something in Oregon.
Lame attempt, son, really lame.
Taylor1, I'm impressed! You've managed to convincingly demonstrate your ignorance without anyone's help. All the little connections you drew are a clever feat of imagination but they remain your private fantasy. As to the Willie Horton thing, the eqivalent of a 527 aired the commercial that showed Horton's race; the first Bush campaign did not. Moreoever, the commercial was directed at Dukakis' ineptitude on law and order; as any intelligent observer would know, it was the Democrats who went out of their way to point out Willie Horton's skin color so they could pretend racism.
Of course Iago would think that Taylor1 was right about the race card. From the commentator who still can't spell my name or a reasonable shortening thereof comes the harebrained theory that a photograph of the subject of an article constitutes racism. The idiocy of this assertion needs no more proof than stating it.
I cannot believe the number of people that are making excuses for this racist being who violated the very essence of human trust.
SHE SANG THE WRONG SONG !!! END OF STORY !!!
You people need to stop lying to yourselves. No wonder the country is screwed up; it's citizens are losing their moral fiber and refuse to face reality.
How dare she tamper with an anthem that Jesus Himself sang while imploring bush to attack Iraq!!!
ROFL..
Does anyone, outside of the 27% right wing moonbats really give a flying f**k about something that means squat? Especially when we're facing an economic depression thanks to the boy wonder in the white house..
Oh Lew but you ARE a racist because of your lamenting the passing of Jesse Helms.. Care to deny it? I have YOUR comments in a file for all to see. And regarding your alleged 'patriotism' - people on the right have NO concept of true patriotism - the kind that questions anything and everything an illicit goverment does rather than just blindly following its mantra like you and your cult does.
Raoul, you are more than funny.
Jesse Helms was just a man who had a long career in politics. Your point?
Care to discuss the Dems support of West Virginia's Robert Byrd? You know, the Ku Klux Klansman who the Dems have continually embraced over the decades?
Son, you haven't a clue what a racist is and yes, there are Black racists as well.
Still, this singer intentionally decieved all in her substitution of songs. Pity that your own hatred blinds you to that small fact!!
Seek help, Raoul, you desperately need it still.
Interesting that Lew is so concerned about a singer in Denver intentionally deceiving a group there while he is not concerned about an administration that deceives an entire country. Selective faux conservative outrage.
Seek help, Raoul, you desperately need it still.
Oh dear - the typical nazi tactic of dehumanization of the opponent in order to dismiss them... lol..
But turning to another comment that merits serious response - hard cheese - you're RIGHT on the mark concerning those who REALLY do need help. They ignore everything regarding this criminal administration and merely hone in on what they want to use to hide behind. Jesse Helms was a bigoted racist deserving of nothing more than ridicule. Lew is just bitter because he allegedly served in another illicit war. I guess he never studied the Gulf of Tonkin resolution and the lies surrounding it.
cheesey, your cries of deception are straight out of the DNC talking points and in pite of millions of taxpayer dollars wasted in seeking evidence of such, none exists.
You all keep forgetting it was your darling Clintons and Democrats making the same claims as did Bush long before he was president.
Mein Kamf, a book you and Raoul are familiar with, I'm sure, says if you keep telling a lie long enough, it will come to be accepted as the truth.
Keep on showing where your allegiance is.
Yanno, Raoul, you're fun when you try to make a point. The economic depression is still barely a blip on the radar screen. And it's not a depression unless you're familiar with an alternate reality utterly invisible to every other person on the planet... at worst, it's a small-scale recession. Get your terms right.
Your attempt to show Lew as a racist is actually sorta cute because it's such a figment of your imagination that it's worth a laugh. Let's look at the record and find out who mentioned Jesse Helm. Guess what? It wasn't Lew! You're so brilliant that you can't tell the difference between Iago and Lew. Coiicidentally, you also managed to come up with an imaginative (and inaccurate) definition of real patriotism. You're heading towards a trifecta of worthless commentary... we're proud of you.
And Hard Cheese is so convinced that the admininstration decieved the entire country that he can't bother to find a lick of real proof. I love how you guys don't actually need to have a single true fact to sound smug and self-righteous.
Jesse Helms was a principaled and honorable senator who strongly opposed the Big Brother tilt of government. His comparison of abortion to genocide happens to coiincide precisely with Jesse Jackson's statement that abortion consitutes "black genocide" because more blacks than whites make use of abortion (generally encouraged by white liberals, interestingly enough). Also interesting is tha fact that the Gulf of Tonkin resolution was a product of a DEMOCRATIC administration that was faithfully following the example of previous leading lights (Roosevelt and Truman) of the party.
Certainly, FDR knew that his claims were untrue when he claimed that German submarines were launching unprovoked attacks on neutral American vessels (when the submarines in question were only firing in self defense). He also engineered the use of neutral American aircraft and ships to aid Britain in locating the German battleship Bismark so they could attack it... and Congress wasn't even asked.
And Truman? Well, building on the fact that America had signed up to be part of the UN, he caused American troops to be deployed in Korea as part of a UN combat force without Congress declaring war. This was and is blatently against the text of the Constitution in which the warmaking powers are given solely to Congress, whether in declaration (both houses) or funding (the House of Representatives). This precedent was subsequently used by Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan, both Bushes, and Clinton to give control of American soldiers to the UN without going to Congress for a formal declaration. Republicans may have used this bad example and are certainly part of the cowardly refusal of Congress to reclaim their Constitutional power but it was a Democrat who set the example.
Think about that next time you feel like pretending that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution says something about Republicans.
Sorry, folks I will have to go with themajority of over 70 per cent of the Americans who believe Bush is a liar. You are and shall remain in the minority.
Cheesey, don't you mean "I will have to go with themajority of over 70 per cent of the Americans POLLED who believe Bush is a liar."
Can you state just how many were polled out of over 300 million people, and from what areas and Demographic make-up?
Seems the polls were saying how despised Bush was and how loved Kerry was in 2004. Seems a lot of voters didn't read the polls.
Then again, 1948 was another banner year for polls, wasn't it? I love that old photo of President Truman holding the newspaper with the headline, "Dewey Defeats Truman."
Part of the left's problem is they live by and worship polls, truthful or not.
You seem to have trouble with the truth, Hard Cheeese. Disapproval doesn't mean distrust. Did Hoover's low ratings mean that the people thought he was a liar? No? Point made.
You are certainly free to offer your evidence that the majority of the American people do not think Bush is a liar, i.e. that he is credible on the Iraq Occupation. I won't hold my breath.
Obfuscation, Cheesey? You made a claim, it is incumbent upon you to support it.
So, just like a definition for victory in Iraq, you don't have any evidence.
Cheesy, can you ever stay on subject? Do you always live behind such a smokescreen?
Support your own claims, son.
Rather than continually dodging Hard Cheese, why don't you just present some facts to rebut his charge that the majority of Amercian people do not believe Bush is credible, a liar. All the polls I have seen seem to say that he is a liar. Surely upi can direct us to some polls or other evidence to support your claim that the majority of Americans believe he is credible. Otherwise it looks like you a merely denying without any backup.
Save your keystrokes Camryn. You will get nothing from Lew other than being told to look it up or linking to some lengthy article and asking you to wade through it and find something that appears to support his position.
Lew does not know that it can be invigorating to realize you've been dead wrong about something. That's why we read history. It's an antecdote to smug self-righteousness, which makes us insufferable. You learn about this from books. But when you are never wrong this joy escapes you.
I see that neither Hard Cheese nor Camryn are familiar with the burden of proof. For those that didn't learn it in high school, the burden of proof is on the person who makes a first claim. In this case, the first claim is that 70% of the American people regard Bush as a liar. If Hard Cheese cannot demonstrate that this is the case, his claim is obviously invalid. Turning it around and demanding that we prove that his claim isn't true is clever but simply consitutes a way of concealing his own lack of evidence. Prove your claim, Hard Cheese, or admit that you're full of it.
Keith Moore, if you are interested in the burden of proof, you might want to read The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, by former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. He presents a tight, meticulously researched legal case that puts George W. Bush on trial in an American courtroom for the murder of nearly 4,000 American soldiers fighting the war in Iraq. Bugliosi sets forth the legal architecture and incontrovertible evidence that President Bush lied us into the Iraq war.
Camryn, the only dodging is by Cheesey. I asked for specifics about the poll he quotes and he supplies none.
Doesn't it ever enter your minds that polls are sometimes 'cooked?' That's why little things like demographics and numbers polled matter.
Would you care to supply the requested info?
Once either of you supply the requested info on Cheesy's claim, perhaps we will discuss polling numbers for the Democrat controlled Congress as well, okay?
Re: burdon of proof.
Various polls have suggested what was posited (bush being a liar) as being valid. The problem is that with neocons NO amount of factual evidence will ever suffice. If bush were seen on TV doing the dirty deed with a goat, his sycophantic followers would exclaim how wonderful it is that he love animals so much. This is why I don't waste my time trying to cite facts and/or other sources - they're only denigraded by the blind.
Camryn,
I'm currently on page 212 of the book. It merely buttresses what I've always known about bush and company. I can only read so many pages per day without my blood boiling. The book is now number 12 on the NY Times book list.
Polls are 'cooked' except, of course, if rush limberger cites one then all of the neocons have a collective orgasm. How pathetic and futile to have to deal with people totally in denial. I have NEVER seen anything like this in my life - a myopic, blind following without question. Nazi Germany was the only thing similar to what we see today.
And still, no one documents the demographics, number polled or what they actual questions were.
Since polls are so important, care to explain how we ended up with McCain instead of Ron Paul?
Camryn, notice how Lew and Keith Moore carefully avoid Bugliosi's proof. It's actually unfair to ask them to respond as they are unequipped to deal with the famed prosecutor who has no ax to grind and merely states the facts. Now the burden is on the defense counsel. By their silence they acknowledge the lie.
I'll read it in more detail but the flaw in the gentleman's argument is apparent without doing any reading. To wit, since he has no prosecutorial authority, has has no ability to demonstrate that any lies were spoken. To demonstrate a lie, you have to demonstrate that the person actually knew that what they were saying was false. Without interviewing people and obtaining other evidence only accessible to a sanctioned prosecutor, Bugilosi lacks the capability to prove that Bush lied. Sorry but his book is more than likely another dry hole.
I'm glad that the gentleman is a famed prosecutor. This is totally irrelevant if his arguments are incorrect or absurd. Based upon the exerpts I've read thus far, your "famed prosecutor" has a little trouble reporting facts honestly. Like him stating that Bush was smiling in a debate with Gore when he mentioned condemning the 3 men who dragged James Byrd to death to death row. He states it as if the obvious-seeming conclusion (that Bush was happy to execute the three men) is the correct one. This is frankly absurd. If it represents the level of honesty the gentleman brings to his analysis, I don't think I'll find the book at all convincing. I suspect you find it convincing because you agree with its premise wholeheartedly.
Keith, am I the only one witnessing some grasping at straws?
All that was asked was some particulars on the poll quoted. I don't know how Bugliosi got into it, but that is also how this crew dances around their claims, never actually supplying supportive documentation.
Just another waste of time asking them to back up what they say with particulars.
Then again, me and you both knew that going in. If you want a liberal who'll at least make a noble ATTEMPT to back himself up, go track down iknowhowtospell. Or for intelligent conversations, Eileen (even if you know, going in, you'll disagree with her). Whatever your opinions of either of them, they have the virtue of not blathering on like imbiciles or dodging demands for proof with subject changes. What that former prosecutor has to do with this subject, only Hard Cheese and his merry men know.
You're absolutely right Mr. Moore. There is NO proof that bush is a pathological liar and that this war was initiated solely to protect oil interests. And, in addition, we are experiencing just a small bump (8 years) in our economic world.
It must be nice to be 24 and have all of the answers to life. Hopefully, when you've gained a few decades under your belt you'll realize how truely rotten and corrupt this country really is.
"It must be nice to be 24 and have all of the answers to life. Hopefully, when you've gained a few decades under your belt you'll realize how truely rotten and corrupt this country really is."
Don't count on it Raoul. Look at Lew.
Well, Raoul, I am old enough to have "a few decades under my belt" and I consider myself to have seen some of the best life has to offer as well as some of the worst and guess what? America is the best country I have been in yet, in my opinion.
But I wonder, if you truly feel "how truely rotten and corrupt this country really is," why do those of you who feel this way remain here?
I honestly don't understand that.
Not so fast Keith Moore. You said I did not understand the burden of proof and when I refer you a book by a noted prosecutor, you dismiss it out of hand. I would be more willing to accept the dismissal if you could specifically point to the evidence set forth in the book that is incorrect. After all that is what a defense attorney would have to do. Of course I am assuming you have actually read the book before you criticized it.
I realize that you were attempting to be cute, Raoul, but your sarcasm was literally correct. As to needing a few decades under my belt, you're assuming that I'll become less intelligent and more immature as I get older. Most people become MORE well-read and learned as they get older and so it shall be with me. Maybe when you're old and decrepit, you'll come to realize that your fact-free view of America was absurd. But to save you time, I'm telling you now. The healing can begin.
You know, I should keep a notepad file filled with sentences I find that I need to repeat endlessly when talking to liberals, especially on blogs. One of these would be: take a moment and read what I said again. I said that without reading the book, I can already identify a flaw in the argument, namely that the author would have no way to access the resources to prove his claim that Bush lied. I also said that based upon exerpts I've been able to get my hands on, the author in question is not entirely honest in his use of fact. Neither of these things require reading the book to know although I have plans to do so, just for the joy of it. I wish to further point out that this prosecutor could be the physical manifestation of Justice on earth but it wouldn't make his argument less or more correct. Thus, the fact that he's a noted prosecutor is utterly irrelevant.
My suspicions are confirmed. You did not read the book. That explains why your rebuttal is so lame.
My 'fact free' comments? Perhaps if you'd followed Camyn's advice and read that book your eyes might have been opened up to the light. Especially the last 3 or 4 pages in which the famous prosecutor didn't even refer to the criminal bush. He spoke about this 'wonderful' country using 'facts' to show how far we've fallen. Example - in other industrialized countries, CEO pay is only about 10 to 15 times that of the lower paid employee. Over here, in Jesus land, the average CEO pay can be as high as 151 times the pay of the employee.
Yeah, you're educated all right - as educated as any other right wing hack. Now go away little boy - you bore me and others with your lack of real intellectual content.
Lew, Lew, Lew - oh PULLEEZZEE stop with the 'why do you remain here' mantra. I have every right to be here - in fact maybe even MORE of a right than the average American since I served in the military like you. I also worked in government service after a successful career in the private sector. And I've probably paid more in taxes than the average earner - not bragging, just stating a fact.
Regarding your premise about this being the greatest country in the world - sorry but wrong. Have you lived in ALL of the other, industrialized ones in order to make such a sweeping statement? Our standard of living has been declining since the gipper declared war on the middle class and labor. The darwinian free market capitalism practiced in this country has made a select few obscenely wealthy while the majority of folks have seen their incomes decline. These are facts Lew regardless of what you fantasize about.
Point taken Iago.. LOL
Raoul, raoul, raoul, I didn't say you should leave, I asked why do you remain where you hate so much?
Do you have a comprehension problem?
Of course you have a right to be here, but I asked why does someone who hates America so much stay?
I didn't say you should leave, I merely asked why remain where you hate.
Now, as for other countries, yes I have been in several. Please learn a little comprehension. I said America is the best "I have been in."
But, I'd still appreicate hearing why so many express such hate for America, but don't desire to leave.
Of course it's lame... a really comprehensive one would be a waste of time since people don't seem really inclined to read them or able to comprehend them. Beyond that, however, obtaining the book would require blowing $20 or more for a book that my perusal (I went to a bookstore that has it and read some of it) indicates is poorly-framed and not a book that I regard as worth owning. Since I'd need to buy the book to have it on hand for the extremely detailed rebuttal, the liklihood of me framing one is low. Make of that what you will although I'll point out that you didn't seem to have an answer for the point that the author wouldn't have the neccessary tools to prove his case (through no fault of his own, I'll admit).
Don't try to be patronizing to me, Raoul. In a mano a mano duel on subjects of economics, politics, history, foreign policy, jus ad bellum, jus in bello, the Constitution, and the law I have no doubt that I could squish you with a little finger. Thus far, your comments in this blog have demonstrating an appalling ignorance of the facts and a marked willingness to believe whatever you're told in liberal press releases. Sure, the author can throw out percentage numbers like the ones you quoted but you forgot to attach their meaning.
If you use the muscle of an all-powerful central state, you can easily put a gun to the head of a corporation and force them to obey your pet theories about what their workers and management ought to be paid. To the uninformed, the result would manifest as a very narrow pay scale (although your facts don't tell us whether the lowest-paid worker in these other industrialized countries enjoys a similar standard of living as the ones in this country). The alternative is a system in which the market determines how much each person is paid. Scarcity creates a higher price; there are, relatively speaking, an extremely low number of high-powered capable CEOs that can lead a company to become extremely wealthy and this rarity translates into a vastly higher pay. On the other end of the scale, almost every citizen of the United States can push a broom and the plentiful nature of these workers means that the price per hour of labor from one of these workers is vastly lower than that of the CEO. Overall, history shows that the market-based system produces prosperity at a much greater rate than the alternative systems. The American minimum-wage worker is better off than his counterpart in another industrialized state so your example falls flat on its face. As with others, you fail.
Mr. Moore, please with the strutting and bragging. I've lost count of the times I've been told how much I could be 'squished' by neonazicon opponents.. ROFL.
Now to the usual evisceration of your ilk:
1. You speak the mantra of typical generalities, once more, regarding SPECIFIC statements. The 'market determines' pay, prices, etc. has been used by your species to hide behind in order to avoid the consequences of the darwinian free market, winner takes all crappola you seem to avoid addressing.
2. I spoke SPECIFICS regarding obscene pay of CEOs here compared to other INDUSTRIALIZED nations. Do you comprehend what I just said? In other words, nations such as Japan, Germany, England, France, and other more civilized countries which care for their citizens unlike this barbaric piece of real estate we reside on.
3. You inquire, in your ignorance, whether those other countries you are clueless over enjoy the same standard of living as us. No, they don't. Theirs is much better - they CARE for their citizens. Universal health care, better unemployment benefits, social programs that protect their people, almost NO homeless living in the streets, many have practically FREE education into and beyond graduate programs, etc.
Need I continue with your education my ignorant pretend intellectual? LOL
4. Capable CEOs leading companies to wealth? Nope, how about those 'leaders' who have led companies down the drain and STILL receive obscene $$$?? You seem to 'avoid' that fact.. [g]
5. Yeah, anyone can push a broom as you put it but how do they get to the broom pushing job if they can't afford a car or even public transportation? You are so out of the loop of reality but once more, no surprise there.
6.History shows us this way of life is superior. Whose history my myopic student of life? Bush's?? Apparently empirical analysis based on factual observation flies over your silly head. History based on what? The right wing neonazicon view of Rush Limbaugh? You seem to have quoted almost word for word from his drug laden mouth at times.
7. Our minimum wage worker is better off than counterparts elsewhere? Yeah, if you compare ours with the African countries workers which is where we're heading. But once more you avoid the facts that show workers in other INDUSTRIALIZED nations are much better off and financially secure than ours.
Those were facts based on numerous sources one can easily find on the internet and other sources including government statistics.
Now like I said before little boy - fly away. Better yet, spend the 20 bucks to read that book you denigrade. You claim, in other post, that you don't want to buy it in order to 'refute' it. How can one have his mind already made up to refute something when one hasn't even read the book? Hmmm.. I believe this esposes your true dishonesty but once more, no surprise since I have also 'squished' your kind before elsewhere.. ROFL.
graciously yours,
raoul
Lew,
While I wait for the youth Moore to 'squish' me, I shall toy with you.
1. Comprehension problem - moi? Well when once asks 'why do your remain here?' the obvious conclusion is 'why don't you leave?'. Aren't the 2 questions the same albeit different words?
2. Hate for America? Once more - nope. Just a wistful sadness over the way it has changed, especially since 1980. The vanishing middle class Lew - any comprehension about that?
Now, what were you saying about a 'comprehension' problem? [g] A simple word of advice - if you wanna play in our playground, please address specifically premises posited and don't simply write things in order to get the last word in, okay? I know the ego is very hard to suppress but that old adage 'silence is golden' is appropriate in your case.
For Mr. Moore and anyone else who wants to make a fool out of themselves - The following four sources are from many to back my facts concerning this not so great land. The young lad of 24 is expected to rebut, in toto, EVERY ONE of my sources. You can cut and paste each of the 4 sites up in your address bar to find the data. You may have Lew assist you in your endeaver. In fact, every neonazicon over here can jump in. I'm used to debating 6 or 10 of you at the same time anyway (with both hands tied behind my back). If you are unable to rebut ALL of my facts I expect a 100 word apology written by you.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/08/13/life.expectancy.ap/index.html - regarding life expectancy over here compared to other countries
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1205/p02s01-usgn.html - regarding our science students compared to other countries. Oh yes, I know what you’ll lamely come back with – this is a result of our ‘liberal’ educational system. But if so, wrong again – it’s a result of massive cutbacks in educational funding. The ‘no child left behind’ should really be called ‘no child left behind to educate since all have been sent to Iraq to spread freedom dust’..
http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/news/releases/child_poverty.htm - regarding child poverty in the allegedly greatest country in the world compared to other countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_living_in_the_United_States - regarding a broad spectrum of factors. The article starts out by saying we’re in the top 20 countries however goes on to show us behind many of the other industrialized (remember that word?) countries. Oh, we are numero uno regarding one thing – the income gap over here is the biggest compared to other countries. But for self made billionaires like you that must be okay, right? ROFL
1. Clever tactic... do not attempt to attack the argument but rather, throw out a personal opinion about the argument that doesn't actually demonstrate anything.
2. Yes, you spoke in specifics. So did I. Specifically, any economic system that isn't American capitalism. This include the socialist systems in France and Germany... in fact, almost all of Europe. You also make the error of comparing socialism to "civilized" which does not historically follow. In truth, socialist systems are a veneer of equality in prosperity over the reality of equality in misery. A socialist system does not reward a kid who decides to sell copy services out of his garage with a $1000 loan... and thus, a socialist system will never produce a Kinkos. Feminists talk about the glass ceiling; socialism is invariably an iron ceiling.
3. Yes. Continue until you get to a true statement.
4. That "fact" is irrelevant. No system, not even the ones that you fawn over, has a stopgap measure against a corrupt person at the top finding a way to enrich himself at the expense of the employees. The question we're considering isn't whether a corrupt person can play the system but whether the system produces an equitable result.
5. There is an answer to that but now you're trying to change the subject to welfare policy. It's gnarled and a royal pain in the ass (especially for government officials who spend their days theorizing a better way to distribute tax monies to the poor) but if you're really hot to discuss it, fine with me.
6. History based upon... well, history. Your history apparently begins this morning. Mine begins around the time that Herodotus began writing stories about Persia invading Greece. We should compare notes.
7. That is unabasedly false. At the very worst, a poor person has the government (using taxpayer money) giving them all food, clothing, and accommodation for free. But most of our "poor" have a microwave, television, fridge, oven, and many of them have their own car. Oh, and they have access to a healthcare system that hasn't been beaten into uselessness by socialist bureaucrats convinced that if they micromanage health care, they'll create a better system. This approach has no evidence of success. Whatsoever. It has evidence of failure, however, such as in Canada. Pristine example: an author traveling in Canada saw a billboard advertising that "MRI is Coming! Summer 1998" where MRI had been introduced in the United States roughtly 15 years before that. A 15-year lag in getting the most modern diagnostic technology... that is what the poor in these other counties have to look forward to. Great system, Raoul.
Yeah, well... I'm like one of those damn bluebottles... you slam your fist down to squish me and find that I've somehow taken up position on the other side of the table and are laughing at you. You're such a funny person.
Raoul, may I be the first person to point out that you are a blithering idiot? Every single one of these problems is due to the US drifting into the more socialist system that you yourself are singing the praises of! But let us take care of them one by one, just to demonstrate that you're delusional.
1. Life expectancy: "Life expectancy is heavily dependent on the criteria used to select the group. In countries with high infant mortality rates, the life expectancy at birth is highly sensitive to the rate of death in the first few years of life. In these cases, another measure such as life expectancy at age 5 (e5) can be used to exclude the effects of infant mortality to reveal the effects of causes of death other than early childhood causes." As you can tell from the quote I just threw at you, life expectancy is hostage to infant morality. Infant morality in the United States started out, in the early 1900s, comfortably below that of other industrialized nations. Then the government began taking steps to socialize our healthcare system which has steadily led to greater infant mortality and thus, lower life expectancy. To me, it's impressive that with an infant mortality rate twice that of Japan, our average lifespan is only 3 years lower. A more useful measure for our purposes is longevity and I eagerly await your citation.
2. Education: Schools in other countries are not controlled by unions and don't contend with our level of governmental interference. The more socialist our schools have become, the lower our educational statistics drops. It's interesting to note that American students are generally superior to those of most of the world at the 4th grade but by the 12th grade, are the bottom of the barrel. So, the longer kids spend in public education, the dumber they get. I'm curious as to how these ingenious international students compare with kids that have been educated in private schools by nuns. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has come up with the notion of seeing whether American private school (or home-school) kids compare favorably in science internationally. Odd ommission, yes?
After this, I suppose, comes child poverty and standard of living. I'll helpfully point out that the factual status of your standard-of-living citation is in dispute but never mind that. Frankly, it's all due to socialism and while the numbers are pretty, what do you expect to happen when a socialist government jacks up taxes and uses the money to give free goodies to everyone? The price of admission to your false paradise is a smiling Big Brother. I think a gent named Orwell wrote about that... I'll have to check. Anyway, after 2 explanations in detail, I find that it's pointless to continue specifically explaining how government handouts produce the results you're praising; if you're really educated, I'm sure you know how the two go together. So do you have something to challenge me?
I'm back.
What'd I miss?
Wasn't this a discussion about using the black national anthem instead of the Star Spangled Banner?
I asked for a complete refutation and all I got was your 'profound' opinion. I expected as much. Now fly away lightweight. You are obviously not up to the task of debate.
NEXT? Anyone? LOL
Almost forgot something Mr. Lightweight - any sources for your profound views? Any?
Didn't think so... (still on the floor laughing)..
I might have asked you the same question. You cite statistics, certainly, but you demonstrate no understanding of what lays behind them. The US infant mortality rate used to be much better; after Medicare and other socializations of medicine, it got worse. Public schools before teachers' unions turned out a good literacy rate and were even up to the challenge of boning students up on math and science when it appeared that the Soviet Union was pulling ahead; now, they are as dismal as you say they are. Longevity is a more accurate measure than a pure life expectancy (although the only articles I can find on it is alarm bells about how longevity is straining welfare systems). I could go on and on but the point is that the system you blather on about in praise is the very one that is causing the rot you sneer at in America. Your solution is to advocate for further adoption of the system that is causing the problem you decry; this demonstrates a profound failure of logic or simply apalling ignorance of the real world. Or it may indicate clinical insanity but head-shrinking isn't my cup of tea so further speculation in that regard would be unproductive.
Now, as you urged me, fly away lightweight... you're obviously not up for the task of elementary analysis.
Wasn't this a discussion about using the black national anthem instead of the Star Spangled Banner?
I could have sworn that is what I put up. Not too sure anymore, though.
Post a Comment