The phrase "American exceptionalism" originates from the American Communist Party. Early examples of the term's usage include a declaration made at the 1930 American Communist convention proclaiming that "the storm of the economic crisis in the United States blew down the house of cards of American exceptionalism". The phrase fell into obscurity for half a century, until it was popularized by American newspapers in the 1980s to describe America's cultural and political uniqueness. The phrase became an issue of contention between presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign, with Republicans attacking Obama for allegedly not believing in it.
Historian Dorothy Ross discussed three currents in American exceptionalism: Protestant American Christians believed American progress would lead to the Christian Millennium. American writers also linked their history to the development of liberty in Anglo-Saxon England, even back to the traditions of the Teutonic tribes that conquered the western Roman empire. Other American writers looked to the "millennial newness" of America, seeing the mass of "virgin land" promised an escape from the decay that befell earlier republics. On Apr 15, 10:43 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > April 15, 2013 **** > > *Are We Being Compromised by Barack Obama's Murky Past?* > > *By* *James A. Lyons* <http://www.americanthinker.com/james_a_lyons/>**** > > Since he first became a presidential candidate, President Obama must have > spent millions of dollars in legal expenses to combat dozens of so-called > "birther" challenges seeking the original documents pertaining to his > birth. As president, he famously issued an electronic document on the White > House website in 2011; the document purported to be his long-form birth > certificate, though it is apparently a forgery. In addition, he has taken > great pains to hide the paper trail of passport records, college > transcripts, and other data -- all of which a prospective employer might > require of a job applicant. **** > > The public's right to know is but a minor consideration. Our overriding > concern should be what unfriendly foreign intelligence adversaries, > particularly Russian, may have obtained on our president's background.**** > > Among all the foreign intelligence agencies, Russian intelligence (SVR) has > a long history and has made a science of studying the backgrounds of > American presidents. Therefore, we must assume that since Russian > intelligence is particularly skilled and a persistent practitioner of this > art, it is possible to the point of certainty that, using all their > resources and "black-bag" tactics, they have long had the biographical > background data that President Obama and his team of lawyers have been so > diligent in concealing from the American public.**** > > The Russians most likely would have started collecting data during Obama's > university years, when he professed radical Marxist views. They were > certainly focusing on him by the time of his celebrated speech at the 2004 > Democratic National Convention.**** > > By that time, Russian intelligence had easy access to the true facts > concerning Obama's birth, parentage, and childhood; his mentor (communist > Frank Marshall Davis); and his college performance, as well as who provided > his finances. They also would have obtained the information on his passport > history and his complete political career and associates.**** > > It is recognized that among all the intelligence agencies, Russian > intelligence is the most skillful in looking for information and points of > leverage -- which are then exploited cleverly and "gently" by Russian > statecraft.**** > > By now, the Russians have most likely have told Obama discreetly that they > have such information. How would they use it? As one old Soviet KGB > operator said, "*Kompromat* [compromising information] is the most powerful > tool of espionage."**** > > Following this thought process, take the issue of how strongly the Russians > objected to our ballistic missile defense (BMD) plans for NATO Europe to > defend against an Iranian nuclear missile threat. Now ponder why President > Obama told Russian President Medvedev in the fall of 2012 that he would > have "more flexibility" to deal with the BMD issue in his second term which > he has now basically canceled. Coincidence?**** > > The current world situation is presenting many complicating challenges to > current and future U.S. objectives. With the Obama administration presiding > over the hollowing out of our military forces and prepared to further > weaken our strategic nuclear posture, our adversaries are being emboldened > to challenge us in a number of areas. The Middle East is in a continued > state of turmoil, with no end in sight. Iran continues to ignore U.N. > sanctions and proceeds with its drive to achieve nuclear weapon capability. > It dismisses the possibility of a U.S. military strike.**** > > In the Pacific, we have to deal with an erratic, unpredictable > nuclear-armed North Korea, who has been making outrageous threats to the > U.S. and our allies. China continues flexing its military muscle, trying to > enforce its illegal claims in the South and East China Seas. Closer to > home, according to Ambassador Roger Noriega, we have an operational Iranian > missile base in Venezuela which can threaten a number of our cities. We > also are witnessing Russia reviving Soviet Cold war tactics in areas of our > strategic interest. Clearly, we are headed into an exceptionally crucial > and dangerous round of geo-strategic confrontations which could have a > profound impact on our future objectives and way of life.**** > > These challenges cannot be ignored. We are led by a man who does not > believe in American exceptionalism or our capitalist foundation. His > lead-from-behind strategy has forfeited the initiative to our adversaries. > Under such circumstances, we cannot afford to be in a position where our > leadership is subject to compromise.**** > > *James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy retired Admiral, was commander-in-chief of the > U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United > Nations.***** > > *Page Printed > from:http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/04/are_we_being_compr... > * at April 15, 2013 - 01:49:34 PM CDT -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
