Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (125327)	2/29/2004 11:45:06 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<The issue is that there should be one official voice, someone who can speak for the nation, and that the "default" position is not to undermine the president and therefore weaken the American position.> A fake 'single' position sounds good, but is not grounded in reality. The USA is not like Saddam's Iraq, where the President is the country. The USA has hundreds of millions of competing interests with as many views. The maelstrom of democracy is the whole point. The Democrats disagree. They are a competing political interest which needs to speak out so the rest of the world knows what might take over from a usurped King George II, the War President. If Ralph Nader takes over, it'll be different. Same as if Dean does. "The Nation" is not even unitary in the actual instruments of power. It is made up of Congress, each member of which has their own interests to represent. That body has actual power and a collective point of view. It's the same with the Senate and the Supreme Court. Each wields power and is "the nation" as much as the President is. If Congress disagrees with George Bush The Younger, they should undermine him. We aliens and UnAmerican types have to deal with that depth of political input. I believe that depth and competition is a major strength of the USA, even if it's more complex to deal with than just dealing with a Saddam who says what's going to be and that's that. Mqurice

To: Neocon who wrote (125327)	2/29/2004 2:33:33 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<there should be one official voice, someone who can speak for the nation, and that the "default" position is not to undermine the president and therefore weaken the American position.> You can't have it both ways. Either the nation speaks with One Voice, and nobody undermines the President by disagreeing publicly with anything he says, and the "default position" is to be silent whenever the government says something any citizen thinks is wrong (and by "government", you seem to mean exclusively the President, not, for instance, Senator Byrd or Kennedy or Kerry), or......... all Americans can criticize the President without fear of being labelled a traitor. It's one or the other. If the nation speaks with One Presidential-Imperial Voice, then Free Speech is an empty husk, a slogan stripped of all content.