One Paragraph
What is so important about certain creeds that we honor them and are offended when they are not treated with respect? ----- Matthew Continenti, Editor of the Washington Free Beacon sums it up in a single paragraph. "We are united in our creed of freedom and equality, and also by our habits, our manners, our national language, our territorial integrity, our national symbols such as the National Anthem, the Flag, And the Pledge of Allegiance -- our civic traditions, and our national story." Which is why kneeling when the Anthem is played or sung, or sitting during the pledge infuriates old codgers like me who have been taught to respect these things since childhood.
In that order but not a lot of difference in magnitude. Our understanding of a United States of America Was that we were part of the greatest country ever. Leaders in almost every industry.
No pride today taught of our countries citizens accomplishments. No winners just a participation ribbon. When the result of the devaluing or our traditions and sacrifices for freedom is displayed by entitled athletes who make more in signing bonuses than most make cumulatively in a lifetime
It is infuriating.
Today's youth and even the middle aged, didn't learn those things and in fact, were taught the opposite...so why do we wonder why, they have no respect for these things..?
It's the people who swore an oath to protect and defend the constitution who violate that oath with every action that are the higher priority (and greater aggravation.)
The U.S. is unique, in that it's the first nation founded on the principle of individual freedom. We aren't interested in conquest, but if people are interested in becoming a part of our unique society, we're willing to let them become citizens, if they agree to learn our language and abide by our principles. We have a right to be proud of our country and its symbols, as we represent what can be accomplished by free people in a unified society with a very special culture devoid of fealty to race, religion, or class.
For starters, the absolute unquestioning obedience to orders is more the exception than the rule. Insightful commanders usually listen to subordinates "on the ground" who may have better information on the situation at hand. There is some tolerance for disobeying orders when circumstances make it the sensible decision. Commanders are supposed to respect the training and experience of junior officers and senior non-commissioned officers to carry out their mission in a manner suited to the real world situation, even if those actions may skirt the rules laid down. If there wasn't a recognition that respect has to go both ways, the American military forces wouldn't be as good at their job as they are. A military force made up of uninspired members treated as cannon fodder is an unquestionable disaster.
The most extreme recognition of individuality is the right to disobey an order that is in violation of the Constitution, or could be a war crime, as in a violation of the rules of the Geneva convention. That right is spelled out in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. "I was just following orders" is not a defense for any American, even the lowest ranking enlistee.
Like American society in general, the American military is made up of free individuals who willingly sacrifice some liberties to protect the republic when necessary. Hopefully we will never face the need to return to a conscript military, as the motivation of free individuals to serve is far more representative of American society.
Just a clarification.
You weren't alone..................
Get out of your head, if you can, the purely ceremonial parade marching, symbolic of the old combat formations of the eighteenth century. Just like the UK justices who have preserved their ridiculous powdered wigs dating from the same period, formation marching is more symbolic than anything else, retained for show. The real, important disciplinary training takes place on the firing range and in training simulations.
The effectiveness of mass formations moving in lockstep began to die with the advent of rifled musketry, and no military organization on the planet today uses the concept. The formation marching has been retained simply because it draws attention, and builds a sense of teamwork. Is a college marching band a collection of mindless drones?
There is no good or bad in scenarios of this sort. Onlr good, better or best. You will never hear of me doing a put-down about the military or any competent force , the key is competent.
I saw the pride and patriotism of my failt and co workers every day. I saw them live it and sometimes die for it. I saw the country after 9/11. I saw it after Viet Nam. I've seen it in all circumstances.
One thing is clear to me - it is best when it stands for what is expressed in the pledge and the National Anthem.
I saw Selma and Birmingham and Montgomery and was sickened. I heard I have a Dream was was moved to tears. The worst and the best of the country.
All of the lessons of history say this country should not exist, free and whole as it is. We have defied the forces of bigotry and hatred many time and will continue to do so as long as the founding creed of the country is known, loved and followed.
It is true that "All men (read people) are created equal and have certain inalienable rights ..."
We follow this and we will be free and whole as a nation. If we don't just cast your eyes eastward and observe the horrors in the middle east..
+1
Rockefeller Kakistokrats that he is ,is far better.
Kissinger remained at Harvard as a member of the faculty in the Department of Government and, with Robert R. Bowie, co-founded the Center for International Affairs in 1958 where he served as associate director. In 1955, he was a consultant to the National Security Council's Operations Coordinating Board.[25] During 1955 and 1956, he was also study director in nuclear weapons and foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. He released his book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy the following year.[26] From 1956 to 1958 he worked for the Rockefeller Brothers Fund as director of its Special Studies Project.[25] He was director of the Harvard Defense Studies Program between 1958 and 1971. He was also director of the Harvard International Seminar between 1951 and 1971. Outside of academia, he served as a consultant to several government agencies and think tanks, including the Operations Research Office, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
There are times when I just gotta hit something to get out the rage that is infuriating me,I take that thing and beat on the bed with it until I'm sweating. Its good exercise and it beats the hell out of wrecking the house. Everything is so expensive nowadays. It was suggested to me by a shrink named Shulman, a buddy of Branden's..
There's some hocus-pocus in it but by and large it's right on target. It speaks of disrespecting our values and culture back to the 1960s, so the march to decadence and disrespect is not a recent thing.