Keresés

Ja, a maradék meg javíthatja texmex spanyolját.

Oszt jól megtanulhatnak fransziául:)

Blue states buzz over secession


By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Secession, which didn't work very well when it was tried once before, is suddenly red hot in the blue states. In certain precincts, anyway.
     One popular map circulating on the Internet shows the 19 blue states won by Sen. John Kerry — Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Maryland and the Northeastern states — conjoined with Canada to form the "United States of Canada." The 31 red states carried by Mr. Bush are depicted as a separate nation dubbed "Jesusland."

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041109-122753-5113r.htm

 

na masodszor

na ja. legtobbekben elsosorban azert kelt zsigeri ellenkezest, mert Bush nem azt a jatekot jatssza, amire ez az orszag eredetileg epult. Marmint hogy a vallas szigoruan maganugye, ebbol nem kovetkezik, hogy az amerikaiak nem vallasosak, az viszont igen, hogy a politizalasnak ehhez semmi koze nem lehet. Sem nem reszesithet  elonyben vagy hatranyban egy egyhazat sem, sem nem tamogathat egyhazakat kozpenzekbol. Mire a vilag tobbi resze adoptalna az egyhaz es az allam szetvalasztasat, addigra Amerika visszatancol.

 

De ez nem uj keletu problema: ez a karikatura 1870-ben keszult:

Egy újabb remek Monbiot piece:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1346771,00.html

 

Comment

Puritanism of the rich

Bush's ideology has its roots in 17th century preaching that the world exists to be conquered

George Monbiot
Tuesday November 9, 2004
The Guardian

..............

Ronan Bennett's excellent new novel, Havoc in its Third Year, about a Puritan revolution in the 1630s, has the force of a parable. An obsession with terrorists (in this case Irish and Jesuit), homosexuality and sexual licence, the vicious chastisement of moral deviance, the disparagement of public support for the poor: swap the black suits for grey ones, and the characters could have walked out of Bush's America.

So why has this ideology resurfaced in 2004? Because it has to. The enrichment of the elite and impoverishment of the lower classes requires a justifying ideology if it is to be sustained. In the US this ideology has to be a religious one. Bush's government is forced back to the doctrines of Puritanism as an historical necessity. If we are to understand what it's up to, we must look not to the 1930s, but to the 1630s.

Érdekes, különben, hogy a hazai Bush-győzelemnek örvendők epileptikus rohamokban törnének ki, ha valaki a hazai jobboldalon emlegetné annak a vallási fanatikus szövegnek akár csak a töredékét, amit Bush és ideológiai hátországa megenged magának.

Hosszan tartó kultúrharc.

a mult het legtobbet meselt vicce (eszak-new york allamban, legalabbis):

 

Mi lesz az eredmenye a masodik polgarhaborunak? Ket allamszovetseg: United States of Canada, melyben Kanadahoz csatlakozik Uj-Anglia osszes allama, a kozep-nyugat eszaki resze es a nyugati part, a tobbi allambol pedig megalakul a United States of Evangelists.

 

Ehhez mar csak tedd hozza, hogy a heten haromszorosara ugrott a kanadai bevandorlasi hivatal tajekoztato oldalanak letoltesszama.

Ha a választási eredmények térképére nézek, Montana, Észak és dél Dakota republikánus, Kalifornia demokrata.

Nem észak és dél, hanem nagyvárosok/iparvidékek, ellenben kis(ebb) városok/farmvidékek.

Az istenes Közép-nyugat szemben az új-Babilonnal, Szodomával és Gomorrával szembeni győzelme......:-)

 

Ha most valami olyat akarsz kisütni a dologból hogy egy polgárháború-előszele a választási eredmény, akkor szerintem tévedsz.

Merthogy? Majd'ugyanott, ahol ez is:

 

Now Bush will be paying the bill

What US voters are telling the world

Leader
Sunday November 7, 2004
The Observer

Some in the United States are already calling Bush's presidential victory the revenge of the confederacy, and there is an element of truth in that. The states and territories which in 1861 fought for the right to own slaves voted for George Bush; those that did not voted for John Kerry. In a closely fought race what seemed to matter in the key swing states such as Florida and Ohio is that the Republicans mobilised their base better than the Democrats; the socially conservative were more minded to vote - and were better organised - than their liberal counterparts.

Semmi új nincs benne, kedves. Pont erről szól: hogy már volt ilyen. Észak vs. Dél.

Mi eben az új?

Falu város, népi vagy urbánus, már az ókorban is volt ilyen.

Röviden arról szól, hogy az ország két gyökeresen és kibékíthetetlenül eltérő értékrendet magáénak valló részre vált, csakúgy, mint a polgárháború előtt, számos szempontból. Ezek közül néhány az abortusz, vallás, Darwin szerepén keresztül a racionalitás/vallásos parancsolatok elsőbbsége, amely Bush esetében a titkosszolgálati adatok hitelességének/fontosságának a megítélését is meghatározta.

:-)

 

Jóvanna, hát egy ilyen gonosz a Zorbán.

Aki egy magyar nyelvű fórumon angol nyelvű  cikkel indít, az egy ilyen témakörben csak olyat kaphat nullázásként, hogy lám-lám, a z0rbán megosztja az usákokat is.

US sets out its holy order

Civil liberties are under threat as the religious right aims for a social blueprint that values faith over reason, writes Albert Scardino

Monday November 8, 2004

Now that the worthy opponent has offered his gracious concession, and now that the victor has promised to spend his political capital, the war can resume. The winner demands unconditional surrender.

Forget the conversation about healing a divided land. Half the population believe the government has no place in personal health care decisions, including abortion. The other half believes abortion to be murder. Half the population believe sexual orientation should not be of concern to the government; half say homosexual unions will lead to the end of civilisation and the extinction of the species. Half accept the teachings of Darwin; half believe Darwin to be a heretic. No healing can reconcile these positions.

The land has been divided before. Until 1863, half the American voters thought people of colour to be people. Half thought them to be two-thirds of a person. That is how the constitution defined people with darker skins for purposes of apportioning representation among the states. These mutually exclusive views led to the civil war and to a revolution in racial, cultural and economic relationships. The revolution ended in 1965 with Lyndon Johnson's legislative programme guaranteeing full civil rights for people of colour. The winner then applied the fruits of victory to all. The losers were left with their dignity.

The counter-revolution has been under way for 40 years. No one yet argues that the civil rights laws of the 1960s should be repealed. In many ways, they have served as the organising principles for the contemporary Republican party. School integration drove much of the backlash that fuelled resentment against social engineering. New laws that guaranteed equal opportunities in employment, housing and public contracting brought more reaction. Anti-discrimination statutes for people with disabilities, immigrants, non-Christian religions and sexual orientation triggered a powerful resentment.

Instead of erupting in to civil disorder, the feelings were sublimated into religion and politics. Now that those feelings are shared by a majority of voters, their half controls the machinery of government. Look for a wholesale assault on the underlying principles of liberalism. The attacks have been well trailed.

The first battle cry: Give people the chance to manage their own pension investments. President Bush has long called for a part-privatisation of social security pension schemes, allowing taxpayers to redirect part of their employment tax payments into investment accounts. If the markets do well, the government will have the same incentive to reduce contributions to pension plans that has left so many private schemes under funded.

When the markets rise, many private retirement accounts will rise, too. When they fall, well, that's the discipline of the market place. Better be nice to your children. The undeserving poor should be allowed to fail, as a warning to others to seek mercy from the creator, and while they are at it, from others in authority. The social security system is an affront to God.

Look for similar market solutions for the big health-care programmes, Medicare and Medicaid, the public insurance programmes that pay for the treatment of old and poor people. Those who cannot pay will have to rely on charity, as they did before Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Roosevelt prevailed on Congress to provide a national safety net. These programmes breed godless socialism.

The battle for the next liberal citadel, the graduated income tax, is halfway won. Since the first Reagan tax cuts more than 20 years ago, national and state income tax rates have fallen by more than half. Estate taxes are on their way out completely. The constitution originally prohibited different rates of tax for different citizens. Land taxes, and customs and stamp duties made up most government revenue. Not until a constitutional amendment in 1913 did a federal income tax arise.

Jim DeMint, the Republican senator-elect from South Carolina, ran on a platform of repealing all income taxes, replacing them with a national sales tax (the US equivalent of VAT) of 23%. DeMint won. His ideas may become formal proposals during the first 100 days of the new Bush administration. His other platform plank, that homosexuals and single mothers should be barred from teaching in public schools, has less of a chance for the time being, but only because teachers are hired at the state level, not by the federal government.

And then there is Charles Darwin. To many Christian fundamentalists, Darwin committed the gravest sin of all, challenging God's natural order. He substituted science and reason for faith and subservience. Many evangelicals have campaigned against textbook publishers and school authorities who refuse to admit creationism as an alternative to the theory of natural selection.

It is not Darwin's science that they rebel against. It is his rejection of faith as the guiding element of life, relying instead on careful research, investigation and measurement. In recent months, Bush has spoken more openly about the role faith has played in his presidency. He has described to other cabinet members how faith led him to accept some intelligence data and reject information in which analysts had more confidence.

It is this faith in a higher being, present always in the White House, that has led to his fervent opposition to stem cell research, to abortion, to untested and unworkable missile-defence systems, to a wide range of policy choices that seem incomprehensible to the "reason-based community" as some of his closest advisers refer to those who do not share the vision.

The victors believe they may have no more than 100 days in the new Congress to convert their social blueprint into a new social order. In those 100 days, a constitutional system based on majority rule with minority protection is under threat. The drafters of the constitution understood that the tyranny of the majority could be more fearsome and destructive than the rule of an autocratic despot. Now, the majority rules, absolutely. There is no room for the dignity of those who fought on the other side.