Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
Yeah that would be a smart move.
Depends on what you mean by "national security". If you mean the collection of ideas that state we need to torture suspected terrorists, detain them at will and without charge or assassinate them again without proof or evidence, gather evidence against American citizens and residents of our nation by violating the Constitution, to invade foreign nations under the pretext that we somehow understand how to install democratic principles in countries with no experience in such things, and continue spending hundreds of billions of dollars on military hardware and the infrastructure to man and support bases around the globe for no apparent reason and benefit to ourselves (at least not without having those bases and troops paid for by the governments and peoples where they will be based as a guarantee of their own security and a recognition that it is somehow in their interest to have American troops around), then no. They should not.
Since that is apparently what "tough on national security" means in our political context, then again no. That would be stupid.
Agreed.
Spoken like a true American hating Liberal.
Just do not forget that this is the one and only country that you can speak out against without fear of governmental reprisal.
The only thing that Liberal Democrats have ever "championed" is the amount of personal monetary gain they can glean for themselves.
FYI – The same goes for the Liberal Republicans.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. B)
This goes for all political parties.
Classical liberal. Thanks. I don't. I get concerned when people start threatening that right. As you seem to be implying should happen by insinuating hatred of America. Which I don't possess. Skepticism is not hatred. Try not to confuse the two in the future.
It's also not the only country in the world with freedom of speech and the subsequent ability to voice criticisms of the government's behaviors or proposed government behaviors.
Yes it is. (I have spent a lot of my earlier adult years in almost every other country in the so-called free world).
Tain't no such animule as a "Classical Liberal" . . . The Marxist led Progressives killed them all off over a hundred years ago. They are just now getting around to the "Classic Conservative" folks.
Don't you ever listen to Glen Beck? :p
No I don't listen to Glenn Beck. I find him incoherent and only worth paying attention to in order to mock. This is true of most pundits of either major political brand.
Classical liberalism look it up. Just because there aren't many political voices that espouse it doesn't mean we're all dead.
I've been to Europe. They don't restrict free speech for or against the government in any of the Western European governments (Denmark, Switzerland, etc). Germany only restricts people from supporting the Nazi party ideology. France and Italy do have some suspicious habits restricting the press, largely because the media companies are either owned by the government or by private individuals who are in their governments. Australia or NZ don't have explicit Constitutional protection, but they don't have laws that restrict it either. Hong Kong still has it. South Africa. India… The only thing I know of that's specifically restricted in the ROK is supporting the North Korean government. People know a good idea when they see one.
There is a difference between hate and constructive criticism.
You gotta stop drinking the kool-aide.
The time I have spent in other countries around the world was in the service of the U.S., believe me – if people in other countries(including all those you have mentioned) espouse anti governmental ideas such as what the "TEA" party movement has done, they will be watched and "looked into" in ways that you can never imagine. Communist China has been working around the clock trying to find ways to eavesdrop everyone on the internet, along with Russia, the U.K., France and even our own U.S. Right now, we are the only country on this planet that has laws controlling our government – all others have laws controlling the population. There is a VERY big difference.
1. Going to other countries as part of our occupational forces really isn't the best way to learn about said countries' culture and customs. Not at all.
2. You do realize the ability to speak out against the government is the only thing that keeps the government in check here in the US. Without that ability (which is too little used nowadays), we would quickly come under the control of tyrants. Questioning the choices of every one of our leaders is our civil duty, the thing that keeps our union together and our Constitution alive.
I have also been to these other countries. Referencing China and Russia is not anything near the list of countries I made. Please stop using a strawman to try to knock down the argument that free speech has not proliferated around the globe in many places. It wasn't even an American idea. It's English. Comes out, in part, from the Magna Carta.
I'd would have to agree that governments investigate their citizens when they say things that are strange or potentially dangerous. The US does it to a far greater extent than most Europeans would (other than neo-Nazi groups in Germany, where you're probably on par with the KKK here anyway). You just need to get out more.