Just 3 Things
On my way home from Kanab today, I switched my satellite radio over to right-wing talk. I do that on long trips sometimes if I'm tired because I stay awake screaming at the hosts.
Tonight, I listened to most of The Rusty Humphries Show, and I tried to keep my screaming to a minimum. While I could write a very, very long rebuttal to most of the things Humphries said (I cringe when I hear pundits say, "I've done the research, so you don't have to," which he said over and over throughout the broadcast. But, I digress.), I only want to comment on one little section that I found interesting.
Most of the show centered around the thesis that "immigration without assimilation will bring a great country to its knees." I disagree with that thesis on many levels, but I have a harder time with it because Humphries didn't define "assimilation." From his ensuing rants, it was difficult to tell what he actually meant.
Anyway, during his discussion of the topic, Humphries quoted Michael Savage (a pundit that I loath beyond belief), who said that the three things that need to be defended to keep our country great are our "borders, language, and culture." I found that conclusion to be overly nationalistic (a word that too often gets confused with "patriotic"), so I decided to write my own list.
The three things that I believe need to be defended to keep our country great are 1) Personal Freedom, 2) Economic Freedom, and 3) an educated populace.
I want to hold off discussing these three things in depth for a bit to see what others have to say. So, here is the question:
What three things do you believe must be defended in order to keep our country great? There are 2 rules: 1) You must name 3, no more, no less; and 2) You cannot use the Constitution as one of your 3 (I get to make the rules, and I think that using that grand old document is cheating. Cheaters aren't allowed :).)
Tonight, I listened to most of The Rusty Humphries Show, and I tried to keep my screaming to a minimum. While I could write a very, very long rebuttal to most of the things Humphries said (I cringe when I hear pundits say, "I've done the research, so you don't have to," which he said over and over throughout the broadcast. But, I digress.), I only want to comment on one little section that I found interesting.
Most of the show centered around the thesis that "immigration without assimilation will bring a great country to its knees." I disagree with that thesis on many levels, but I have a harder time with it because Humphries didn't define "assimilation." From his ensuing rants, it was difficult to tell what he actually meant.
Anyway, during his discussion of the topic, Humphries quoted Michael Savage (a pundit that I loath beyond belief), who said that the three things that need to be defended to keep our country great are our "borders, language, and culture." I found that conclusion to be overly nationalistic (a word that too often gets confused with "patriotic"), so I decided to write my own list.
The three things that I believe need to be defended to keep our country great are 1) Personal Freedom, 2) Economic Freedom, and 3) an educated populace.
I want to hold off discussing these three things in depth for a bit to see what others have to say. So, here is the question:
What three things do you believe must be defended in order to keep our country great? There are 2 rules: 1) You must name 3, no more, no less; and 2) You cannot use the Constitution as one of your 3 (I get to make the rules, and I think that using that grand old document is cheating. Cheaters aren't allowed :).)
Labels: Jeff's Rants
posted by Jeff at
1:02 AM
3 Comments:
The three things we need to keep our country great? That's simple - 1) Beer, 2) Sports, and 3) Girls Gone Wild videos.
Ok just kiddin', actually I like your three things just fine, can't think of anything better.
Have never heard of Rusty Humphries, but if he's anything like Savage then he must be a ranting ass.
However, I do believe assimilation of immigrants is a desirable outcome, if one defines "assimilation" as learning the language of the country (anywhere you go in the world, language is strongly tied to national identity) and - if not adopting - at least respecting its existing cultural and social mores. We only have to look as far as the Francofada to see what happens when immigrant groups are not blended into a nation's broad social framework.
And it's well and good for immigrants to add elements of their own culture to the host country (especially in the area of cuisine, yum), but a line is crossed when immigrants try to undermine the value systems that give a country its national identity - especially when the host country has a tradition of espousing democratic liberties and human rights. Bringing the despicable tradition of "honor killing" to Canada, for example, is not just a violation of Canadian law but an assault on the very social character of Canada itself as a free society that respects the rights of women. In my mind, "assimilation" in part means leaving that kind of bullshit back in whatever Crapistan it is that you came from.
By
Garry, At
1:15 PM, March 31, 2007
My three are 1) freedom of speech 2) separation of religion and state and 3) a government based upon viable checks and balances.
I like your three too, though. But I'm a stubborn originalist and so I had to pick a different three ;)
I'm glad to read Garry's description of Michael Savage as a ranting Ass. Yay!!! Will you say something about Rush, too, Garry, while you're at it? For my part, I think that Nancy Pelosi is a rabble rouser and a posturer of the first waters.
By
Unknown, At
11:59 PM, April 18, 2007
My husband contributes his three:
1)life (includes more than just being alive, includes quality of life, and more than just human life)
2)liberty (not the freedom from responsibility; the agency to choose what is best for you within certain bounds of societal well-being, without someone else's decisions and thoughts forcing you)
3)pursuit of happiness (pursuit of things that would actually bring individual happiness, with the limitation being the infringement upon another person's happiness.)
How's that?
By
Unknown, At
12:11 AM, April 19, 2007
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home