Everybody doesn't hate America of course.
For a start millions of Americans love their country for lots of very good genuine reasons.
The list of wonderful things that have happened in the world due entirely or partly to the bravery of US citizens and it's financial might is huge.
A few US citizens have posted here and on the old forum about how uncomfortable they've felt when being questioned by Brits or Aussies or, well, pretty well anybody that isn't a US citizen and how much anti American sentiment there seems to be.
There are threads in political theories addressing the question of freedom of speech in America and the evidence points to the subtle and not so subtle reduction of that unalienable right.
I have been accused of being anti American and have gone to great lengths to refute the accusation.
Trouble is I'm finding it more difficult to argue from a position of being pro american when just about everything that emanates from the administration currently in the White House is in my opinion so reprehensible.
The US has always considered itself superior to every other nation on the planet. This has been indisputable. But when the most powerful nation uses its strength and influence solely for self agrandisement with little or no regard for the consequences ill feeling is bound to fester and grow into bitter resentment.
The apparent lack of respect for other religions, customs and beliefs have always been evident but no more so than the blatant hatred for |slam and its adherents.
Bitter resentment grew into deep hatred and ultimately to the dispicable act that was the destruction of the World trade centre, the attack on the Pentagon and the thousands who worked in and around the buildings and those who were on the aircraft.
The fact was that only a minority of human beings that heard or saw the news asked Why.
That minority was predominantly American. Insular and without any knowledge of what goes on in the rest of America let alone the rest of the world.
The backlash has been devastating, and stems from that very insularity and ignorance.
Iraqis, who had nothing whatever to do with the September 11th outrage, will now enjoy freedom.
But it will be the freedom the US allows them to have. No Shia clerics will be allowed to wield political influence. The result must surely be a long held deep resentment towards the US which the average American will be unable to understand.
As a UK citizen or rather a subject of Her Majesty, I enjoy freedoms similar to those in the US.
In fact I'd say that despite the lack of a written constitution I'm better off. Not likely to be executed and then found to be innocent frinstance. Its nice not having the death penalty. I digress...
My freedom of speech allows me to engage in the favourite British (English, actually) pastime of slagging off the French. Never mind that our two countries were effectively one for centuries.
United and then divided over and over until Wellington and Napoleon settled things in 19th century.
The French are proud. We Brits might say excessively proud. They are contemptuous of the British willingness to be so close to the US when Britains future is so economically and strategically tied to Europe. We resent their contempt pointing out the natural historical links that bind our former colony which is now a super power.
But for all their arrogance and pride the French could never be accused of being petulant and childish. Unlike the US administration.
I have my fingers crossed and am hoping desperately that the people of the US, once the magnitude of the confidence trick that has been played upon them by the monsters that are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, becomes manifest, they will sweep them from power and elect a group of enlightened fearless individuals prepared to have the US engage positively with the rest of the planet.
Full Version: The United States Of America
First of all, I think the French-America thing could be shortlived. Remember during the bombing of Libya when the French refused to allow US planes into their airspace? That tiff lasted a couple of years. This one is worse, I admit, but the French governmental administrators acted with remarkable lack of professionalism and diplomacy. Remember the one who called Bush a cunt? That was charming.
Really, they left themselves wide open. Of COURSE he's an idiot. But if you wig out and scream and holler and treat the entire US government with disdain, people in Topeka are gonna get offended. They voted for the moron after all. And now they're scared, and you're telling them they're idiots who voted for an idiot... it just isn't how these things should be handled. I thought Russia handled it brilliantly -- with great maturity and common sense. Germany scared itself to death in the last election by making the French mistake (remember the government official who called Bush a Nazi? How we laughed...) just sort of hid behind the understandable veil of being anti-war across the board. Most Americans prefer the Germans to be anti-war, so that was more forgiveable to them anyway. (Although it did lead to the Jay Leno joke: 'I can understand the French wimpin' out, but the GERMANS?? What's goin' on here?)
As for the rest of it, my problems are this: there was an anti-American streak a mile wide among the French population long before 11 September, as there is in Spain. This was less of a truism in Germany before, and in Russia where it is still not really an issue. American foreign policy is an issue, true, but most of the problem is Israel, which is a complex mix of valid concerns and anger, ugly anti-semitism (a problem in Europe as long as there have been Jews in Europe), and hey-I've-got-an-idea-why-don't-you-blame-Sharon kind of dysfunctionalism.
But yes and no, Martyn. Yes, many Americans are ignorant of the affects US foreign policy has on other people's views of them. Yes, the US has done things it shouldn't have done as a nation. Yes, people hate America (and by association Americans) because of it. Yes, the hegemony situation now is worsening that because people elsewhere feel powerless. But, yes the French government acted like twats, yes there ain't a hell of a lot the US can do about the current superpower vacuum, yes the Israelis are largely responsible for the actions of their own government, and no I do not think there is a valid or serious anti-Europe movement in Washington concerned that the EU might become a superpower. Precisely the opposite in fact. I've read a number of articles detailing the longstanding desire in Washington for the EU to get its act together and become more economically and militarily powerful. Because the EU is Washington's biggest ally. This would, clearly provide balance in the changing world in which China is likely to become a serious superpower in our lifetimes.
So, I think the situation you're talking about, Martyn, is to be short-lived. The world is changing quickly. In a couple of years, we'll all look back on this period with puzzlement, wondering how it could have all gone so wrong so quickly.
Really, they left themselves wide open. Of COURSE he's an idiot. But if you wig out and scream and holler and treat the entire US government with disdain, people in Topeka are gonna get offended. They voted for the moron after all. And now they're scared, and you're telling them they're idiots who voted for an idiot... it just isn't how these things should be handled. I thought Russia handled it brilliantly -- with great maturity and common sense. Germany scared itself to death in the last election by making the French mistake (remember the government official who called Bush a Nazi? How we laughed...) just sort of hid behind the understandable veil of being anti-war across the board. Most Americans prefer the Germans to be anti-war, so that was more forgiveable to them anyway. (Although it did lead to the Jay Leno joke: 'I can understand the French wimpin' out, but the GERMANS?? What's goin' on here?)
As for the rest of it, my problems are this: there was an anti-American streak a mile wide among the French population long before 11 September, as there is in Spain. This was less of a truism in Germany before, and in Russia where it is still not really an issue. American foreign policy is an issue, true, but most of the problem is Israel, which is a complex mix of valid concerns and anger, ugly anti-semitism (a problem in Europe as long as there have been Jews in Europe), and hey-I've-got-an-idea-why-don't-you-blame-Sharon kind of dysfunctionalism.
But yes and no, Martyn. Yes, many Americans are ignorant of the affects US foreign policy has on other people's views of them. Yes, the US has done things it shouldn't have done as a nation. Yes, people hate America (and by association Americans) because of it. Yes, the hegemony situation now is worsening that because people elsewhere feel powerless. But, yes the French government acted like twats, yes there ain't a hell of a lot the US can do about the current superpower vacuum, yes the Israelis are largely responsible for the actions of their own government, and no I do not think there is a valid or serious anti-Europe movement in Washington concerned that the EU might become a superpower. Precisely the opposite in fact. I've read a number of articles detailing the longstanding desire in Washington for the EU to get its act together and become more economically and militarily powerful. Because the EU is Washington's biggest ally. This would, clearly provide balance in the changing world in which China is likely to become a serious superpower in our lifetimes.
So, I think the situation you're talking about, Martyn, is to be short-lived. The world is changing quickly. In a couple of years, we'll all look back on this period with puzzlement, wondering how it could have all gone so wrong so quickly.
Most resentment comes from 'they are bigger than us' feelings. Nothing highbrow about it, no honest anger over decisions or actions from the US government, but simple underdog anger.
Sad but true. That's why the dutch hate germans, belgium people hate the dutch and everybody hates the US.
Sad but true. That's why the dutch hate germans, belgium people hate the dutch and everybody hates the US.
Hi! 
I see this forum has been quiet for ages, but wanted to add a commentary.
Agreeing with the vast majority of what has been said, I'll talk a little about Spain, which is what i most closely know:
So-called "anti-americanism" in Spain has to do with anti-imperialism, meanwhile American people are of course still very welcome in the country! (Specially the veterans of the International Brigades hehe 
)
But specially the lefties haven't forgotten what a mess has been done of Latin America and the unfortunate role of various US govertments in it.
Spanish people have always been very connected to Latin America and there's a lot of solidarity and working-together going on.
So it has not only to do with the Mid-East, but it was there before. Actually, too many Spanish people have little understanding for any Islamic nor Israelist nor Jew nor anything cause, having been closed in an ignorant, narrow and excluding religious culture for ages!
A good point is also that the current Spanish govertment has got absolute majority and they abuse it, acting without consideration of what the people want. This follows a tradition of little dialogue and much power-of-the-strong in our politics, and had created already tensions a couple of times before the war in Irak, "Prestige"disaster at the front.
The big-and-bigger anti-war reaction had to do with this as well, a govertment sending a nation into war, while 85% of the people (average, following polls) is against it.
(Still, they were re-ellected in the local elections, so definitively everybody's nuts there
)
Another point is that countries with a large spread language tend to live more in themselves and therefore react stronger against what is seen as cultural imperialism of others, surely a reason why some American things confront rejection in Spain or France.
I see this forum has been quiet for ages, but wanted to add a commentary.Agreeing with the vast majority of what has been said, I'll talk a little about Spain, which is what i most closely know:
So-called "anti-americanism" in Spain has to do with anti-imperialism, meanwhile American people are of course still very welcome in the country!
(Specially the veterans of the International Brigades hehe )But specially the lefties haven't forgotten what a mess has been done of Latin America and the unfortunate role of various US govertments in it.
Spanish people have always been very connected to Latin America and there's a lot of solidarity and working-together going on.
So it has not only to do with the Mid-East, but it was there before. Actually, too many Spanish people have little understanding for any Islamic nor Israelist nor Jew nor anything cause, having been closed in an ignorant, narrow and excluding religious culture for ages!
A good point is also that the current Spanish govertment has got absolute majority and they abuse it, acting without consideration of what the people want. This follows a tradition of little dialogue and much power-of-the-strong in our politics, and had created already tensions a couple of times before the war in Irak, "Prestige"disaster at the front.
The big-and-bigger anti-war reaction had to do with this as well, a govertment sending a nation into war, while 85% of the people (average, following polls) is against it.
(Still, they were re-ellected in the local elections, so definitively everybody's nuts there
)Another point is that countries with a large spread language tend to live more in themselves and therefore react stronger against what is seen as cultural imperialism of others, surely a reason why some American things confront rejection in Spain or France.
QUOTE(Leontien @ Apr 28 2003, 12:28 PM)
Most resentment comes from 'they are bigger than us' feelings.
and younger than us!
Wanted to say something about the magnificence that is GWB and can't be bothered starting another thread.
I noted with some amusement (along with sandwich spitting out rage - I got lumps of ploughmans lunch over my dash) the contrast between Super shrub's response to the Carter group's peace plan, " I fully support and endorse moves towards peace"(or whatever he said but it was essentially this) flying in the face of Sharron, middle finger raised etc "Hey, Look at me Arab peoples. The US Prez really does care about palestinians in partic' and moslems in general and I'm not scared to piss off the Isrealis if it'll get you to think twice about taking pot shots at US soldiers and citizens" and his announcement to the steel workers of Pennsylvania via a lacky, that he was ditching the job saving (but illegal) tarrifs half way through to save his own skin.
Cynical I may be, but the fact is that he continues, despite 3 years in the whitehouse, to demonstrate breathtaking cowardice and selfishness no matter what.
Edit to change cinical to Cynical...Oops.
I noted with some amusement (along with sandwich spitting out rage - I got lumps of ploughmans lunch over my dash) the contrast between Super shrub's response to the Carter group's peace plan, " I fully support and endorse moves towards peace"(or whatever he said but it was essentially this) flying in the face of Sharron, middle finger raised etc "Hey, Look at me Arab peoples. The US Prez really does care about palestinians in partic' and moslems in general and I'm not scared to piss off the Isrealis if it'll get you to think twice about taking pot shots at US soldiers and citizens" and his announcement to the steel workers of Pennsylvania via a lacky, that he was ditching the job saving (but illegal) tarrifs half way through to save his own skin.
Cynical I may be, but the fact is that he continues, despite 3 years in the whitehouse, to demonstrate breathtaking cowardice and selfishness no matter what.
Edit to change cinical to Cynical...Oops.
QUOTE
Remember the one who called Bush a cunt? That was charming.
Missed that one! He probably thought he was being restrained in the circumstances but what an unholy insult to women and their lovers ...
Whilst looking in on the NASCAR web site I came across something which somehow defines the reason Maria and so many of her fellow Americans shun motorsport of all kinds and NASCAR in particular.
At the end of a story about Jeff Burton not being able to get his #99 car sponsored for 2004 came this delightfull advertisement...
At the end of a story about Jeff Burton not being able to get his #99 car sponsored for 2004 came this delightfull advertisement...
.. . with authentic blood color, the actual sounds of a deer hit with a high velocity bullet, different screams for you amateurs hitting it in the wrong place, and a choice at the end whether to eat it or just throw the carcase away and keep the antlers for the den ... free plastic genuine copy skinning knife given away with each game ... suitable for children aged three years old and upwards ...
like them or not,give the americans one thing.theyve got the nerve to get off their arses and kick out a corrupt government (ime on about the british).correct me if ime wrong,but the last time we british went on 'nationwide riot' was 1381.
oh and by the way.if it wasnt for the yanks (a native american indian term),we brits would all be speaking german now!
oh and by the way.if it wasnt for the yanks (a native american indian term),we brits would all be speaking german now!
Actually, if it wasn't for the Red Army, you Brits would still be speaking German. It was the ill begotten German invasion of Russia and the subsequent defense by the Russian people that defeated Germany.
i was actually on about ww1 not 2.
thanks for the reply though.do i need correcting on 1381?
thanks for the reply though.do i need correcting on 1381?
The Germans didn't lose the war with Britain because they'd started one with Russia; they started one with Russia because they'd lost one with Britain.
By which eleventh hour the Americans decided if they left weighed in any later, they wouldn't be able to influence the place afterwards.
By which eleventh hour the Americans decided if they left weighed in any later, they wouldn't be able to influence the place afterwards.
That's an interesting analysis SYME. My interpretation of World War II is that Britain was huddled on its little island and holding out, but it hadn't run Germany out of Europe. It was the Russians who mostly did that--although the Allied troops did good work in Western Europe.
World War I? I didn't think the US did much of anything in that war. You'll have to educate me.
World War I? I didn't think the US did much of anything in that war. You'll have to educate me.
My take on one reason why the US took so long to get into WWI was that Wilson spent a good deal of time before the war began begging France, Germany and Britain not to do it, and they told him, one at a time and in spectacular fashion, to go fuck himself. Then when they started slitting each other's throats, they needed help, but he was (unsurprisingly?) reluctant to get involved.
World War I was a totally stupid war--I think it was about a bunch of Euorpean nations (Germany, France and the UK) fighting over imperialist supremacy. It wasted so many young lives. I have no idea why we entered the damned thing in the first place. Maybe it had to do with some ship that was sunk by the Germans. The best part of World War I from the American perspective is that the US was in it for such a short time.
The reason given was the sinking of the Lusitania which was after all a spy ship. It was the excuse Wilson used to get into the war against the wishes of the American people, who up to that point were uninterested in every way in helping our "Allies".
For americans, the best thing that came out of WWI was the literary tradition. Most of the great writers of the 20th century fought in the war, and it had a huge impact on their writing and lifestyle (Hemingway, Fitzgerald although he never actually shipped out, a fistful of playwrites and musicians and newspaper men and critics).
For americans, the best thing that came out of WWI was the literary tradition. Most of the great writers of the 20th century fought in the war, and it had a huge impact on their writing and lifestyle (Hemingway, Fitzgerald although he never actually shipped out, a fistful of playwrites and musicians and newspaper men and critics).
QUOTE(dandyy @ Jan 14 2004, 08:38 PM)
Do i need correcting on 1381?
I dunno...I must look up that date and see what happened.
I do recall hearing about the British getting thoroughly pissed off with their King, cutting off his head and creating a Commonwealth. I think that counts as a civil war. Something rather more ambitious than a riot.
As for the American war of independence, that was actually a civil war too.
Fought between the British colonists of a far distant land and the loyal subjects of His Majesty King George the Third.
And the French and the Huegonots and the native Americans.
QUOTE
I do recall hearing about the British getting thoroughly pissed off with their King, cutting off his head and creating a Commonwealth. I think that counts as a civil war. Something rather more ambitious than a riot.
Martyn: that was The English Civil War or Revolution (depending on how you read history). That lasted approx. from 1642-1649. Cromwell, despite popular conservative accounts of this period (represented in the film "To Kill A King" unfortunately), actually snuffed out the radical elements (the diggers, the levellers and the ranters, all more or less proto-agrarian communists) and brought the king back a few years later and went on some 'adventures' in Ireland. Read Christopher Hill. He's the expert in this.
1381, I think, were the first poll-tax riots. They were referred to a lot when Thatcher introduced her version some 600 years later. and we all know where that got her...
Not sure if that is the actual date though.
QUOTE(Bingalls @ Jan 22 2004, 08:07 AM)
And the French and the Huegonots and the native Americans.
Good Lord Bingalls!
Don't make things any more complicated than they need to be.
All that lot were a bunch of bally savages encouraged by Johnny Foreigner.
I'll leave it for others to decide which were the savages.
The whole point is that Americans weren't involved. We Brits beat ourselves.
I don't buy that BBC explanation, Martyn. I thinkt he war was about imperialism and all sides were scummy. The Russian army had the sense to rebel and then pull out, but they got embroiled not only in revolution but a civil war.
Face it--the world's a mess and no nation has good or God on its side.
Face it--the world's a mess and no nation has good or God on its side.
Have you ever read "A Soldier of the Great War" by Mark Halperin, a true right wing weirdo who writes like an angel? I love WWI fiction, "Regeneration", "A Farewell to Arms". It was such an interesting time, everything changed after 1914. Except for women and black people, things really went downhill after that.
Rambling on about history at 2:48 am.
Rambling on about history at 2:48 am.
I've never heard any of this Lusitania stuff. We were taught that the German Archduke Franz Ferdinand was shot in Sarajevo (presumably by a Serb, but maybe by the Germans cooking up a reason to invade Serbia, which they declare war on); and the Serbs' allies the Russians and the French declare war on Germany.
And that the Balance of Power system of allegiances automatically set humongous armies against each other before anyone knew what was what. Except everyone was against Germany, it seems. I thought the Brits only ... executed their finest million specimens, because they were over-confident about their power.
Martyn, maybe you can tell me why the Canadian states didn't automatically get seceded with the rest, of which presumably a few wanted to stay in the club. Were they a seperate set to begin with, for some reason, d'you know?
One of the reasons there was no bread for Marie-Antoinette to give the masses was that Louis had bankrupted the state keeping perfidious Albion back by paying for America to get independent of it.
And that the Balance of Power system of allegiances automatically set humongous armies against each other before anyone knew what was what. Except everyone was against Germany, it seems. I thought the Brits only ... executed their finest million specimens, because they were over-confident about their power.
Martyn, maybe you can tell me why the Canadian states didn't automatically get seceded with the rest, of which presumably a few wanted to stay in the club. Were they a seperate set to begin with, for some reason, d'you know?
One of the reasons there was no bread for Marie-Antoinette to give the masses was that Louis had bankrupted the state keeping perfidious Albion back by paying for America to get independent of it.
Te Lusitania stuff was just about why the US entered the war. It was bigtime propaganda. My mother told me that Americans went in all big and blowheart singing Over Thre Over There Send the Word Send the Word to Beware, but in a few months time they really changed their tune. It was a horrible war. But then, what war isn't?
Was it an American ship, was it (named after the Latin for Portugal, by the way)? I take your point, Carol, I just forgot to say (and it's not the first time), about the Russians doing the lion's share of the fighting. Yeah, you might say that war was slightly worse than normal.
I've heard US statesmen sound pretty pissed off the British didn't go to Viet Nam; but that's what the Yanks get for siding with their own system so late in the Second World ... Farce, and the Brits knew from experience what wars are winnable and what aren't, and children have to be allowed to make their own mistakes.
I've heard US statesmen sound pretty pissed off the British didn't go to Viet Nam; but that's what the Yanks get for siding with their own system so late in the Second World ... Farce, and the Brits knew from experience what wars are winnable and what aren't, and children have to be allowed to make their own mistakes.
Martyn
I know the discussion here has moved on but just to get back to your original question on anti-Americanism.
I think your dilemma stems from the fact that you seem to have a "national" rather than a "class" analysis of the world.
If you see the world in terms of nations fighting each other for dominance then its not surprising that you end up with a dilemma of which "nation" to support in a dispute. It flows from that that if a country is dominant and aggressive like, say the USA at this moment in history, then you may be tempted to oppose or support, the entire nation, hence nationalism and its opposite.
Marxists, like myself, for example, don't analyse the world primarily as divided into nations but as divided into opposing classes: the working class and the ruling class.
As such we are internationalists and have no problem with opposing say, the USA ruling class and their imperialist aggressions around the world whilst at the same time expressing our solidarity with our American brothers and sisters when they go on strike to defend themselves from the bosses.
For internationalists, "anti-Americanism" is a prejudice that is not fundamentally any different from other prejudices like racism, sexism, homophobia etc.
And like all those other prejudices, anti-Americanism is a tool of the bosses and its purpose is to divide the world working class. Progressive thinkers like yourself should oppose it.
Regards
Paul
(formerly paulx)
As for all those wars that have been mentioned. They were all wars waged by one ruling class against its own workers or against another ruling class to dominate markets or extend their influence.
A ruling class does not go to war because an obscure archduke gets assassinated. Events like that are just the excuse that ruling classes use to justify their wars. Its the underlying social and economic circumstances which cause the ruling classes to start wars.
I know the discussion here has moved on but just to get back to your original question on anti-Americanism.
I think your dilemma stems from the fact that you seem to have a "national" rather than a "class" analysis of the world.
If you see the world in terms of nations fighting each other for dominance then its not surprising that you end up with a dilemma of which "nation" to support in a dispute. It flows from that that if a country is dominant and aggressive like, say the USA at this moment in history, then you may be tempted to oppose or support, the entire nation, hence nationalism and its opposite.
Marxists, like myself, for example, don't analyse the world primarily as divided into nations but as divided into opposing classes: the working class and the ruling class.
As such we are internationalists and have no problem with opposing say, the USA ruling class and their imperialist aggressions around the world whilst at the same time expressing our solidarity with our American brothers and sisters when they go on strike to defend themselves from the bosses.
For internationalists, "anti-Americanism" is a prejudice that is not fundamentally any different from other prejudices like racism, sexism, homophobia etc.
And like all those other prejudices, anti-Americanism is a tool of the bosses and its purpose is to divide the world working class. Progressive thinkers like yourself should oppose it.
Regards
Paul
(formerly paulx)
As for all those wars that have been mentioned. They were all wars waged by one ruling class against its own workers or against another ruling class to dominate markets or extend their influence.
A ruling class does not go to war because an obscure archduke gets assassinated. Events like that are just the excuse that ruling classes use to justify their wars. Its the underlying social and economic circumstances which cause the ruling classes to start wars.
I'm going to say I dislike America for it's foriegn policy, and sheer amount of hypocracy. It certainly is the land of the free - a land thats has killed millions in the "name of democracy." A land that has set up countless dictators. A land that lets corperations rape the world. A land that is overtly militaristic and severly lacking freedom as each day goes on.
Not to mention they're not exactly red friendly. They equate communism to fascism. They are so far right wing I get whip lash looking over from my spot on the political spectrum. The workers of America, whom I still consider comrades, are even more misguided. Controled and manipulated by racism and fear.
Not to mention they're not exactly red friendly. They equate communism to fascism. They are so far right wing I get whip lash looking over from my spot on the political spectrum. The workers of America, whom I still consider comrades, are even more misguided. Controled and manipulated by racism and fear.
QUOTE
Iron Fisted America
By Charles Sullivan
11/14/05 "ICH " -- -- Understanding the collective American psyche is no easy task. To those living in other lands we Americans are an enigma. Indeed, we are an enigma unto ourselves. To others we appear foolish, dim-witted, cowardly and morally bankrupt. To allow the rise of a fascist regime to take power is compelling evidence for those views. Let me try to explain why.
Nothing in America is what we are told it is. Whenever the president speaks—it matters little which president we are talking about—we can be reasonably certain that they do not utter truth as we know it. During the past fifty years America has not had a socially progressive president. The Clinton presidency was under siege from day one by the power hungry ideologues fueled by Christian evangelicals. Bill Clinton certainly was no progressive, as his detractors would have us believe. At his most liberal Clinton was nothing more than Bush lite. He twice won the presidency by out righting the right. Clearly, this was no victory for progressives. No modern era American president represents the interest of the people. They represent the rich and powerful. The same is true of Congress.
Every branch of the American government is awash in corporate money in sums so vast as to boggle the mind. Little wonder that the American government does not serve the interest and needs of the people. It serves the wants of soulless corporate entities whose only concern is unbridled bottom line capitalism.
To further complicate matters, the vast majority of the media is under the control of the same corporate oligarchy that direct the government. The corporate media, as the name implies, serves the corporate interest. Little that the corporate media tells us has any relevance to truth as most of us know it. The corporate media are purveyors of lies and distortions that are used to subdue and control the public mind, often for sinister purposes. Seek alternative channels of information that flow from non corporate sources. There you will find what you need to know to be free.
Every branch of government and ninety nine percent of the media operates in the corporate interest—not in the public interest, as we all too willingly assume. America is not even close to resembling a democracy, as the national myth proclaims—it is a corporate oligarchy. It is a deeply class divided society in which the rich prey upon the poor. Here it is the poor who do the bidding of the rich. It is the poor who fight the wars for the economic gains realized by the power elite. It is the antithesis of Robin Hood. Here the rich routinely steal from the poor. They rob them senseless and call it democracy!
America is a land of contradictions. Under the edicts of unrestrained capitalism, the people serve primarily as drones and producers of capital for the wealthy. The majority of the people are mindless consumers of goods. They are automatons at the service of the unscrupulous gods of finance and material power. Their needs do not matter to those in power. They exist to cheer the captains of commerce on in their joyful work of consuming the planet.
The world knows only too well that America is a violent nation. They know, many of them first hand, that America preys upon the poor and the defenseless. The manner in which the corporate oligarchy that drives American politics treats its own down trodden is a microcosm of how it treats the rest of the world. The extermination of the indigenous people of North America by pious Anglo invaders is an atrocity that makes the Nazi liquidation of the Jews pale in comparison. America has yet to come to grips with its initial episode of genocide and ethnic cleansing that may be at the root of its pathological behavior. The annihilation of the American Indian was just the beginning of what capitalism could do.
Multinational corporations view the earth as a vast aggregation of commodities and markets to be exploited for profit. They do not regard the world’s citizens as human beings. They are sources of cheap labor and consumers, to be exploited by those in power. Ecosystems and the biological systems that promote life are summarily ignored by corporatism.
Global capitalism is a malignancy intent upon devouring the world. It seeks to commodify everything and every one. It intends to privatize the entire planet, effectively placing the world’s resources into the smooth, grasping, white hands of a few wealthy individuals. This explains the existence of the Bilderbergers, an annual gathering of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful people who meet to determine the course of global capitalism. Along with the World Bank and the IMF it sets the world’s financial and political agenda. It also represents the establishment of a world government—George Herbert Walker Bush’s ‘New World Order.’
From cradle to grave the collective American mind is under the all pervasive assault of corporatism. This is all we have ever known; it is all most of us will ever know. It explains our combined failure to see the world in terms that can only be described as Disneyesque. Every day in America is an adventure in the implausible Land of Oz As a people we have no conception of reality. We have been carefully insulated from the pain and suffering we have inflicted and continue to inflict upon the world. Quite literally, we not know not what we do. But even more tellingly, we don’t want to know.
When we invade sovereign nations we are told that we are liberating its oppressed people from the throes of tyranny. When we enslave and torture Islamic people we are told that they are terrorists who mean us harm. In true Machiavellian terms, the ends justify the means. This also explains why we cannot come to grips through honest reckoning with the horrors of the national tragedy we call history. We have unelected leaders who lie, maim and murder and we call them Christian. Isn’t that strange?
We target nations with left wing leaders like Venezuela’s popular president Hugo Chavez and call them threats to democracy, when we ourselves have no conception of what democracy looks like. The only threat that Hugo Chavez poses to the United States is that he places the needs of the people above the profits of multinational corporations; and that is as un-American as it gets. Anti-capitalist equates to un-American in the diseased mind of corporatism. This is why the U.S. has deposed not only Chavez but Aristeed in Haiti, and a whole litany of South American pro people, pro environment, pro democracy, and pro labor leaders. That is why CIA operatives have routinely instigated coups against the hemisphere’s most popular democratically elected leaders. That is why so many of them have been assassinated by bullets paid for by our tax dollars. Countless others have been beaten, tortured, and disappeared, courtesy of U.S. tax dollars.
The corporate oligarchy loathes democracy because democracy demands the evenhanded distribution of wealth. It demands accountability. It requires justice. It seeks to know truth. No matter what pretensions we may make to the contrary, the U.S. has a long history of opposing democracy throughout the world. The undeniable proof lies hidden in our national history; a history that has been carefully thrust down the memory hole of an Orwellian nightmare we have unwittingly helped to forge through unfettered complacency.
From North Korea, Viet Nam, Guatemala, Panama, Columbia, Cuba, Venezuela, Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, the Philippines, Cambodia, the former Soviet Union, Iran, Syria, Eastern Europe, Haiti, and Jamaica—I could go on indefinitely—America’s military might has always opposed and snuffed out fledgling democracies. Every U.S. military intervention during the past fifty years and longer acted to put down insurrections of popular movements of the people. A thoughtful examination of the evidence makes it clear that the obvious and only possible conclusion is that our military might is used not to promote liberation, democracy, and freedom. It serves as the iron fist of capitalism to smash the face of people’s movements for social justice and autonomy. U.S. militarism is the arm of corporatism that invades and plunders sovereign nations to rob them of treasure and resources. Its purpose is to open new markets to capitalism; to create pools of slave labor and a constant stream of cheap goods for American consumption. It is Wal-Mart amplified a hundred thousand times and projected across the globe.
None of this is news. We are simply witnessing the unrestrained avarice of the rich and powerful running rough shod over the principles of democracy and social justice. It is the continuation of Manifest Destiny. It is the sound of the rich and powerful preying upon the poor and the innocent. None of it is what we have been told. We must open our eyes and our minds to see it for what it really is. We must come to grips with our own sordid history and all that it has wrought. Only then we can begin to do something about the present and the future.
Charles Sullivan is a furniture maker, photographer, and free lance writer living in the eastern panhandle of West Virginia. He welcomes your comments at earthdog@highstream.net
By Charles Sullivan
11/14/05 "ICH " -- -- Understanding the collective American psyche is no easy task. To those living in other lands we Americans are an enigma. Indeed, we are an enigma unto ourselves. To others we appear foolish, dim-witted, cowardly and morally bankrupt. To allow the rise of a fascist regime to take power is compelling evidence for those views. Let me try to explain why.
Nothing in America is what we are told it is. Whenever the president speaks—it matters little which president we are talking about—we can be reasonably certain that they do not utter truth as we know it. During the past fifty years America has not had a socially progressive president. The Clinton presidency was under siege from day one by the power hungry ideologues fueled by Christian evangelicals. Bill Clinton certainly was no progressive, as his detractors would have us believe. At his most liberal Clinton was nothing more than Bush lite. He twice won the presidency by out righting the right. Clearly, this was no victory for progressives. No modern era American president represents the interest of the people. They represent the rich and powerful. The same is true of Congress.
Every branch of the American government is awash in corporate money in sums so vast as to boggle the mind. Little wonder that the American government does not serve the interest and needs of the people. It serves the wants of soulless corporate entities whose only concern is unbridled bottom line capitalism.
To further complicate matters, the vast majority of the media is under the control of the same corporate oligarchy that direct the government. The corporate media, as the name implies, serves the corporate interest. Little that the corporate media tells us has any relevance to truth as most of us know it. The corporate media are purveyors of lies and distortions that are used to subdue and control the public mind, often for sinister purposes. Seek alternative channels of information that flow from non corporate sources. There you will find what you need to know to be free.
Every branch of government and ninety nine percent of the media operates in the corporate interest—not in the public interest, as we all too willingly assume. America is not even close to resembling a democracy, as the national myth proclaims—it is a corporate oligarchy. It is a deeply class divided society in which the rich prey upon the poor. Here it is the poor who do the bidding of the rich. It is the poor who fight the wars for the economic gains realized by the power elite. It is the antithesis of Robin Hood. Here the rich routinely steal from the poor. They rob them senseless and call it democracy!
America is a land of contradictions. Under the edicts of unrestrained capitalism, the people serve primarily as drones and producers of capital for the wealthy. The majority of the people are mindless consumers of goods. They are automatons at the service of the unscrupulous gods of finance and material power. Their needs do not matter to those in power. They exist to cheer the captains of commerce on in their joyful work of consuming the planet.
The world knows only too well that America is a violent nation. They know, many of them first hand, that America preys upon the poor and the defenseless. The manner in which the corporate oligarchy that drives American politics treats its own down trodden is a microcosm of how it treats the rest of the world. The extermination of the indigenous people of North America by pious Anglo invaders is an atrocity that makes the Nazi liquidation of the Jews pale in comparison. America has yet to come to grips with its initial episode of genocide and ethnic cleansing that may be at the root of its pathological behavior. The annihilation of the American Indian was just the beginning of what capitalism could do.
Multinational corporations view the earth as a vast aggregation of commodities and markets to be exploited for profit. They do not regard the world’s citizens as human beings. They are sources of cheap labor and consumers, to be exploited by those in power. Ecosystems and the biological systems that promote life are summarily ignored by corporatism.
Global capitalism is a malignancy intent upon devouring the world. It seeks to commodify everything and every one. It intends to privatize the entire planet, effectively placing the world’s resources into the smooth, grasping, white hands of a few wealthy individuals. This explains the existence of the Bilderbergers, an annual gathering of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful people who meet to determine the course of global capitalism. Along with the World Bank and the IMF it sets the world’s financial and political agenda. It also represents the establishment of a world government—George Herbert Walker Bush’s ‘New World Order.’
From cradle to grave the collective American mind is under the all pervasive assault of corporatism. This is all we have ever known; it is all most of us will ever know. It explains our combined failure to see the world in terms that can only be described as Disneyesque. Every day in America is an adventure in the implausible Land of Oz As a people we have no conception of reality. We have been carefully insulated from the pain and suffering we have inflicted and continue to inflict upon the world. Quite literally, we not know not what we do. But even more tellingly, we don’t want to know.
When we invade sovereign nations we are told that we are liberating its oppressed people from the throes of tyranny. When we enslave and torture Islamic people we are told that they are terrorists who mean us harm. In true Machiavellian terms, the ends justify the means. This also explains why we cannot come to grips through honest reckoning with the horrors of the national tragedy we call history. We have unelected leaders who lie, maim and murder and we call them Christian. Isn’t that strange?
We target nations with left wing leaders like Venezuela’s popular president Hugo Chavez and call them threats to democracy, when we ourselves have no conception of what democracy looks like. The only threat that Hugo Chavez poses to the United States is that he places the needs of the people above the profits of multinational corporations; and that is as un-American as it gets. Anti-capitalist equates to un-American in the diseased mind of corporatism. This is why the U.S. has deposed not only Chavez but Aristeed in Haiti, and a whole litany of South American pro people, pro environment, pro democracy, and pro labor leaders. That is why CIA operatives have routinely instigated coups against the hemisphere’s most popular democratically elected leaders. That is why so many of them have been assassinated by bullets paid for by our tax dollars. Countless others have been beaten, tortured, and disappeared, courtesy of U.S. tax dollars.
The corporate oligarchy loathes democracy because democracy demands the evenhanded distribution of wealth. It demands accountability. It requires justice. It seeks to know truth. No matter what pretensions we may make to the contrary, the U.S. has a long history of opposing democracy throughout the world. The undeniable proof lies hidden in our national history; a history that has been carefully thrust down the memory hole of an Orwellian nightmare we have unwittingly helped to forge through unfettered complacency.
From North Korea, Viet Nam, Guatemala, Panama, Columbia, Cuba, Venezuela, Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, the Philippines, Cambodia, the former Soviet Union, Iran, Syria, Eastern Europe, Haiti, and Jamaica—I could go on indefinitely—America’s military might has always opposed and snuffed out fledgling democracies. Every U.S. military intervention during the past fifty years and longer acted to put down insurrections of popular movements of the people. A thoughtful examination of the evidence makes it clear that the obvious and only possible conclusion is that our military might is used not to promote liberation, democracy, and freedom. It serves as the iron fist of capitalism to smash the face of people’s movements for social justice and autonomy. U.S. militarism is the arm of corporatism that invades and plunders sovereign nations to rob them of treasure and resources. Its purpose is to open new markets to capitalism; to create pools of slave labor and a constant stream of cheap goods for American consumption. It is Wal-Mart amplified a hundred thousand times and projected across the globe.
None of this is news. We are simply witnessing the unrestrained avarice of the rich and powerful running rough shod over the principles of democracy and social justice. It is the continuation of Manifest Destiny. It is the sound of the rich and powerful preying upon the poor and the innocent. None of it is what we have been told. We must open our eyes and our minds to see it for what it really is. We must come to grips with our own sordid history and all that it has wrought. Only then we can begin to do something about the present and the future.
Charles Sullivan is a furniture maker, photographer, and free lance writer living in the eastern panhandle of West Virginia. He welcomes your comments at earthdog@highstream.net
QUOTE(SYME @ Jan 26 2004, 12:53 AM)
Was it an American ship, was it (named after the Latin for Portugal, by the way)? I take your point, Carol, I just forgot to say (and it's not the first time), about the Russians doing the lion's share of the fighting. Yeah, you might say that war was slightly worse than normal.
I've heard US statesmen sound pretty pissed off the British didn't go to Viet Nam; but that's what the Yanks get for siding with their own system so late in the Second World ... Farce, and the Brits knew from experience what wars are winnable and what aren't, and children have to be allowed to make their own mistakes.
I've heard US statesmen sound pretty pissed off the British didn't go to Viet Nam; but that's what the Yanks get for siding with their own system so late in the Second World ... Farce, and the Brits knew from experience what wars are winnable and what aren't, and children have to be allowed to make their own mistakes.
Excuse me but the Lucsitania wasn't the actual reason the the Americans joined in WWI. The defining act was a telepgraph from Germany to Mexico asking the Mexicans to invade the USA, sent via the USA. Unfortunately for the Germans the British were reading the German cables and had broken their codes. The British read the telegraph before the German Abmbasador did. A break in was staged (I think in the USA) to find said telegraph which was passed on to the Amreicans.
As for WWII the German Army was ripped apart by the Russians. If Germany hadn't invaded Russia there's no way that anyone could have invaded Western Europe from Britain. Alternatively if Germany had invaded Britain in 1940 they'd probably have succeeded & the world would look rather different now.
Finally why do people dislike the USA. It's the same reason why many people still dislike us in the UK. We used to be top dog & throw our weight around. Most people/countries don't like bulllied. The only difference is that we used move in and to take over whilst the USA either invade or use financial musscle.
There are still a few people out thee in the big wide world that love the US of A.
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
I posted it and it gives me the shivers.
i worked in the states for a number of years and in lots of ways love the people and the place
but in other ways am very concious of their blinkered views, but in the same way if you spend some time out of the uk its surprising how quickly you start to see the uk from a wider perspective and see how blinkered some of the uk views are
i like americans and the usa
however i dont think it does the world any good to have one superpower which is so dominant, and the unrepresntative clique running the us should certainly have more humility but then so should the unrepresentative clique running the uk
in the same way i have lots of arab friends and love them as brothers, but also recognise some of the blinkered views they hold for what they are
we all need to figure out a way to live in as much peace and harmony as human nature will allow us to have
but in other ways am very concious of their blinkered views, but in the same way if you spend some time out of the uk its surprising how quickly you start to see the uk from a wider perspective and see how blinkered some of the uk views are
i like americans and the usa
however i dont think it does the world any good to have one superpower which is so dominant, and the unrepresntative clique running the us should certainly have more humility but then so should the unrepresentative clique running the uk
in the same way i have lots of arab friends and love them as brothers, but also recognise some of the blinkered views they hold for what they are
we all need to figure out a way to live in as much peace and harmony as human nature will allow us to have
QUOTE(Martyn @ Dec 15 2005, 10:41 PM)
There are still a few people out thee in the big wide world that love the US of A.
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
QUOTE(Martyn @ Dec 15 2005, 11:41 PM)
There are still a few people out thee in the big wide world that love the US of A.
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
However America has a trick up her sleeve to make sure that the ranks of Stars and stripes burners will swell still further.
Get yours here!
Oh God. I think I'm gonna puke...
It's a reality that's too horrible to comprehend fully. A Neo-Con Dynasty of the Bush family. Creationism in the class rooms, religious fundamentalism in the boardrooms, government buildings, and court rooms. Corporations granted even more rights as a 'living' entity. Workers denied even more rights. Freedom being forced down the throats of the world, with a gun and a bomb being used to reforce the their idea of liberty. Sexuality exploited, women portrayed as objects of carnal desire who should submit to the whim of man. Free Trade where nothing is Fair. The future mortaged to satisfy the small souled who need BIG cars to make themselves feel like they mean something - regardless of the impact or truth.
I'm going outside to start hitching a lift off this planet. A Bush Dynasty just scares me.
I'm not worried. He looks like the kind of fellow who's shagged a few housekeepers and babysitters in his time. Possibly had gay affairs. I think he won't run.
He'll be the right's Mario Cuomo.
Gosh, remember when the Republicans banged on and on about how the Kennedy 'dynasty' was going to destroy American democracy if Bobby Kennedy was elected president? Banged on and on and on until somebody shot the poor son of a bitch. How their attitude changes when the Gucci loafer is on the other foot.
He'll be the right's Mario Cuomo.
Gosh, remember when the Republicans banged on and on about how the Kennedy 'dynasty' was going to destroy American democracy if Bobby Kennedy was elected president? Banged on and on and on until somebody shot the poor son of a bitch. How their attitude changes when the Gucci loafer is on the other foot.
QUOTE(Mata @ Dec 16 2005, 09:42 AM)
I'm not worried. He looks like the kind of fellow who's shagged a few housekeepers and babysitters in his time. Possibly had gay affairs. I think he won't run.
I agree. My attitude towards Jeb has always been that he must have some big old skeletons in the closet, otherwise he would have run in '00, when many people expected him to.
I have to say, other than John McCain (who will run, even if his chances of actually getting the nomination are pretty slim) I'm really not sure who the main contenders from the Dark Side are for '08. I don't buy the mutterings about Colin Powell (too liberal, too disliked) or Condi Rice (never going to happen), and Cheney still claims to have no presidential ambitions. And surely no-one takes old hacks who say they're interested - like Newt Gingrich - very seriously.
So what are other people's opinons on this? Who will the Reps run in '08? For want of a better phrase, what's the best/ worst case scenario as far as everyone else is concerned?
Applying the same point to the Dems, also, I personally reckon on Hillary Clinton, Mark Warner, John Edwards, John Kerry, Tom Vilsack and maybe Harry Reid having a go? I wouldn't rule out Al Gore having another go, although I think he'd be a fool. I can't make up my mind about Barak Obama - I love the guy, but I really don't want him to peak too soon...
It's just a fool's game with 3 years to go, of course, but my money's on a Clinton/ Warner ticket, for better or worse.
It's just a fool's game with 3 years to go, of course, but my money's on a Clinton/ Warner ticket, for better or worse.
I can't decide what I want. I like Hillary, but all my friends who should know these things think she'll get her head handed to her. Sexism and politics are merry bedfellows. But then I lose all hope because nobody else looks good enough or ready. I wish I thought John Edwards was as smart as he is handsome. I'd put all my money on that horse then.
What do you like about Hilary Clinton?
Aside from my personal feelings about her, I think she's in the crosshairs of right wing hysteria and could possibly ruin the Dems chances.
I think Barack needs a couple of terms in the Senate before we could seriously think of him. And he'd better get out of the middle.
Jeb Bush will be reminded daily of Terri Schivo and other ham-handed right wing fuck ups. I don't think another Bush (so soon anyway).
Aside from my personal feelings about her, I think she's in the crosshairs of right wing hysteria and could possibly ruin the Dems chances.
I think Barack needs a couple of terms in the Senate before we could seriously think of him. And he'd better get out of the middle.
Jeb Bush will be reminded daily of Terri Schivo and other ham-handed right wing fuck ups. I don't think another Bush (so soon anyway).
I don't understand why in the States, Democrat losers seem to disappear so quickly. I can' think I've even heard John Kerry's name mentioned since the day after the result. I though Al Gore was good (and probably won the election anyway)- and was the nearest to an environmentalist that we will see in US politics for a long time. Bring back Al.
Handjob, John Kerry is back in the Senate and is running for president in '08. I get e-mails from his campaign three times a week. Al Gore is on the lecture circuit and has been speaking out - like he should have when he ran for president - on environmental and peace issues. He recently helped launch a television station called Current - aimed at hip young folks.
John Edwards has a poverty center in the Carolina he lives in (I can't remember which one). These guys only wait about three weeks after an election to start campaigning again.
*sigh*
John Edwards has a poverty center in the Carolina he lives in (I can't remember which one). These guys only wait about three weeks after an election to start campaigning again.
*sigh*
Thanks for that update IMB. I think we get off lightly with campaigning. I think our politics are a bit slapstick in comparison. John Kerry - what is it with his hair, I looked and looked and I don't think I saw it move at all in the last campaign- gave him the look of a cardboard cutout - which can't win votes can it?
QUOTE(itsmeBarbara @ Dec 16 2005, 07:25 PM)
Handjob, John Kerry is back in the Senate and is running for president in '08. I get e-mails from his campaign three times a week. Al Gore is on the lecture circuit and has been speaking out - like he should have when he ran for president - on environmental and peace issues. He recently helped launch a television station called Current - aimed at hip young folks.
John Edwards has a poverty center in the Carolina he lives in (I can't remember which one). These guys only wait about three weeks after an election to start campaigning again.
*sigh*
John Edwards has a poverty center in the Carolina he lives in (I can't remember which one). These guys only wait about three weeks after an election to start campaigning again.
*sigh*
Oops
QUOTE(Handjob @ Dec 16 2005, 08:01 PM)
John Kerry - what is it with his hair, I looked and looked and I don't think I saw it move at all in the last campaign- gave him the look of a cardboard cutout - which can't win votes can it?
Have you ever seen the movie Re-Animator? There's a rather disturbing sex scene in it, featuring a guy who is the absolute spit of John Kerry. So offputting.
Zogby America Poll. Dec. 6-8, 2005.
"If the Democratic primary for president were held today, for whom would you vote: [see below]?" Asked of potential Democratic primary voters
Hillary Clinton 26%
John Edwards 12%
Joe Lieberman 10%
John Kerry 9%
Barack Obama 7%
Joe Biden 3%
Wesley Clark 3%
Bill Richardson 3%
Mark Warner 1%
Evan Bayh 1%
Tim Kaine 1%
Someone else 6%
Won't vote/Unsure 19%
"If the Republican primary for president were held today, for whom would you vote: [see below]?" Asked of potential Republican primary voters
John McCain 19%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Condoleezza Rice 12%
Jeb Bush 4%
Newt Gingrich 4%
George Allen 3%
Bill Frist 3%
Mitt Romney 2%
Tim Pawlenty 2%
Fred Thompson 1%
Mike Huckabee 1%
Sam Brownback 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
George Pataki 1%
Rick Santorum 0%
Haley Barbour 0%
Mark Sanford 0%
Someone else 4%
Won't vote/Unsure 26%
Sample=1,013 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.1%
"If the Democratic primary for president were held today, for whom would you vote: [see below]?" Asked of potential Democratic primary voters
Hillary Clinton 26%
John Edwards 12%
Joe Lieberman 10%
John Kerry 9%
Barack Obama 7%
Joe Biden 3%
Wesley Clark 3%
Bill Richardson 3%
Mark Warner 1%
Evan Bayh 1%
Tim Kaine 1%
Someone else 6%
Won't vote/Unsure 19%
"If the Republican primary for president were held today, for whom would you vote: [see below]?" Asked of potential Republican primary voters
John McCain 19%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Condoleezza Rice 12%
Jeb Bush 4%
Newt Gingrich 4%
George Allen 3%
Bill Frist 3%
Mitt Romney 2%
Tim Pawlenty 2%
Fred Thompson 1%
Mike Huckabee 1%
Sam Brownback 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
George Pataki 1%
Rick Santorum 0%
Haley Barbour 0%
Mark Sanford 0%
Someone else 4%
Won't vote/Unsure 26%
Sample=1,013 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.1%
I will put my money on am all girl line up for the next one
Rice V Clinton
Rice V Clinton
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.