Yuku free message boards

Stan, #532, re: "Muuther#428- Cindy Sheehan is probably in line behind Danny Glover and Sean Penn to pleasure Hugo Chavez or one of the Castro brothers. Jon Stewart exposed that little bit of her misplaced affection quite a while back. Sure she and penn want everyone to believe that is the true left, but at the end of the day Chavez, either Castro or even Nicaraugua's Daniel Ortega are more than likely nothing more than little whores for the cocaine cartels rather than true socialists."

Well, I don't give a Tinker's Damn about the political endorsements of entertainment celebrities, or about the actions and policies of foreign officials whose countries aren't of major military or economic importance to the world community. Cuba was important during the Cold War because the USSR could use it as a military base close enough to be a serious threat to the USA and the rest of the Americas, but I can't imagine any of the Islamic nuclear powers putting missiles there, or Alqueda-type terrorists operating from Cuban soil. And even though Venezuela is a major oil-exporter, I don't see it was pivotal in any future "oil wars".

Stan, #534, re: "Rebel#440- You know I've been all over this thread in recent days and cannot honestly recall what I have commented on or not(or even more than once!). I just had to compliment you on your comments on this post. They made me feel a bit less guilty for the debt I am in since the bank is finding more and more creative ways to take a bite out of my paycheck with their crappy fees. I must be clear on this. I may not necessarily agree with the Marx and Engels ideology mainly because of the potential for people like Pol Pot and Danny Glover to pervert it, but I do admire the way they clearly saw certain things about society in general along with their apparent sincerity in wanting to fix them."

The important thing to realize about Marx and Engels is that they were "scientific" pioneers like Darwin and Freud who left a large body of writings that have served as foundation documents for massive amounts of further research and have ALREADY had a major influence on the evolution of Western civilization as a whole. It's a mistake to follow the letter of the theories described by any of these writers, but IMO, it's an even bigger mistake not to be familar with the basic ideas in them. And in all three cases, about the only way to get a grasp of these basics is to read the original material, because just about all the "interpretations" or "popularizations" now available have been spin-doctored to the point where it's useless to read them. And of course Marx and Freud are harder to study because their writings have to be read in translation, whereas Darwin wrote in English and "Origin of Species" is actually fairly easy to understand....

Stan, #537, re: "Rebel#448- I am becoming less and less of a fan of the Clintons in recent years, but the way I see it in 2008 Hillary had a worldview responibly as we can expect a politician to have for sale to the highest bidder while Obama would sell anything (including his grandmother who mysteriously passed away just before election day '08) to anyone looking like they might buy with enough kickbacks for him that he won't have to worry about where his next eight ball of cocaine is coming from too soon. I get why Carville was getting so pissed over so many democrats turning their back on the Clinton establishment for the blatently false hope and change of Ted Kennedy's most elaborate legislative liberal deathbed wishes getting granted by a simple run of the mill snake oil salesman from Chicago just because he had a law degree from Harvard Law. When will they learn in Red Sox nation anyway? When will the rest of our allegedly decisive majority learn?"

Well, I voted for Bill Clinton in '92 as the lesser of two evil and never had very high expectations for him, considering that a literal Lizard (The Newt) was in control of Congress at the time, and there really wasn't much he could do to stop the Neocon Agenda from being implemented. I was actually a little surprised that he was able to fight the Republicans hard enough that they resorted to such dirty tricks to slow him down, meaning the whole sexual scandal mess. And I was actually disappointed that the Democrats couldn't find anyone better than Hillary to support going into the 2008 campaign, but again I supported her for the nomination early on as the lesser of several evils. The only reason I supported Obama when it became obvious that he was going to get nominated was because I felt that continuing to support Hils would actually help the Republicans, and they didn't have ANY candidates I felt would be better than Obama. Do I wish I'd supported McCain and Palin now? I think if I had it to do over again, I very well might. There was already massive opposition to the GWB Administration from many different parts of the political spectrum, and I'm sure that a McCain Administration would have been such an obvious continuation of the status quo that this opposition would have become more united, not more fragmented as it has become under Obama. One fact that I didn't think of in advance is that it takes exactly the same number of votes to pass legislation over a Presidential veto as it does over a filibuster. And another is that having Obama leading the reform movement is like having a corrupt union leader in the pay of the bosses proposing a labor contract -- the damn thing gets compromised away to nothing behind closed doors. So even though I don't like Demo leaders like Nancy Pelosi, I suspect it might be better to have people like her writing legislation like the health care reform bill -- she at least has been pressured by the people who vote for her re-election every two years to support a real public option

Stan, #535, re: "Hamster#441- That was interesting. I never got to see much of Rachel Maddow's show and have heard that she can be more even handed than many openly liberal biased commentaters. There was plenty of Cliched crap about Obama's race and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck being "buffoons"(one could easily say the same for others who have shows on Rachel's network and be equally correct), but an interesting point is raised here. For years now the so called Religious Right has been a cause for concern, but I worry that they be completely discounted to the peril of the well being of this country since they do represent a healthy chunk of our population. To call Obama the anti christ is a pretty tired thing to do. It's as tired as calling his critics rascist without a valid argument to prove racism. Every leader in recent years has had to bear that burden from some portion of the electorate who would consider them the "antichrist". Don't forget that Ronald Wilson Reagan has six letters in each name. Many people in the early eightees didn't forget that when he first became President. Clearly these things can be discounted to a large extent or at least marginalized to the far right wing just as anyone considering George W Bush evil could be marginalized to the far left wing. The biggest problem I see with the left remains that they are too quick to dismiss their critics and that will cost them eventually imho. Like it or not I have met alot of people from many different walks of life who question whether Obama was really born in the United States. Some are also very educated. Whether he has proven adequately that he was born in Hawaii or not does not matter. The left can write these people off as so called "birthers" all they want, but alot of Americans have serious concerns still about this. Many are even really pissed off at right wing commentaters like Bill O'reilly for giving the President the benefit of the doubt on being born in Hawaii. Like O'reilly I would also like to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard for me to shake my image of Hawaii in 1961 as being anything more serious than Elvis Presley wiggling his ass on a black sand beach while he sings about clambakes and wondering how a group of islands out in the middle of the ocean just barely granted statehood could seriously be able to determine who was really born there (or keep any other official records) as opposed to who really wanted a piece of paper saying they were born there for the right price. It may be different now, but birth certificates were once easily enough screwed with and few people cared. When I was thirteen in the late seventies I doctored a ten cent library copy machine version of my birth certificate to make myself look a few years older. No one looked for official seals back then and I can imagine that a crappy photocopy could obtain a newer version with the seal in later years when such things became more important if the timing was right. So some may ask what the big deal was? Well I got into bars alot more than any other eighth grader and bought four cases of beer for the Junior Varsity football team with that crappy wrinkled piece of paper the next year as a freshman in high school during an open lunch. Sure the drinking age was only eighteen back then in New York(which was one of the original thirteen colonies as opposed to the 50th state), but I was still only thirteen and fourteen when I used it and no one even batted an eye.

With all that said I have to make this personal observation about the religious right. Many so called fiscal conservatives who truly believe in tax breaks and small government see the holy roller element of any conservative coalition as a handicap. While Fresh and I tend to be a bit more right of center these days((ok she is always far right of center lol) we laughed our asses off at last weeks episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm. many right wing talk radio people were mortified when Larry David's stream of urine was so wild because of a medication he was taken that he accidently got a drop on a picture of Jesus right under his eye giving the impression that Jesus was dripping a tear in that painting. People in the right wing media were ready to crucify Larry's way of mocking the "goyum(sp?)" who fell to their knees at the sight of this "tear" as a so called miracle, but Fresh and I still laughed our asses off. In fact I almost went into an asthma attack I was laughing so hard to be honest with you.

Hammy, #540, re: "I keep getting this pop up and I aint clicking it, and it's 4 aint it???"

Hammy, #541, re: "she has 2 eyes,,,, why, am I dumb American???"

Yup, she only has 2 eyes, and I think we discussed this pict before in one of the optical illusion threads. It was simply designed to give a three-dimensional effect if viewed from exactly the right distance. If you're too far back, you see four eyes....

Stan, #542, re: #470- It may now be a popular label for conservative talkers who don't want to seem biased, but I highly doubt any current definition would entirely define mt opinions,but I may be conservative on some things and liberal on others issue by issue, but i suspect the closest word to define how I see things would be Libertarian if I even spelled that right, but I suspect there's a little bit of everything from Paleo Conservative to perhaps even Anarchist inside my disturbed mind. I always did like that "A" with the circle around it and Punk Rock was pretty cool..."

Well, as I'm always saying, I don't think labels like "liberal", "conservative", "libertarian", "anarchist", etc. mean a damn thing any more unless the user's exact definition of the term is provided in context. And the only political labels that mean anything to me right now are "doctrinaire versus open-minded" or "true believer versus free thinker". My own political opinions are a duke's mixture just like yours, but the components in the mix are a little different. However, since both of us tend to be open-minded to what you might call a radical extent, we are able to discuss politics constructively....

Muu, #555, re: "heheh i hate this thread but i got to laughing at what i took from it just now.... 1. stan flew on as i psychically expected....heheh and made ya all post 100 more posts..cackle....hehe 2. sr said tinkers damn.....hehe my eyes spotted that easy and then i promptly chuckled loudly 3. ham was the comedy of the evening with the chinese lady and 4 eyes.... as i cant even believe you brought this up because for DAYS ON END HAM THAT LADY HAS BEEN ON EVERY POST AND DRIVING ME NUTS AND EACH TIME I SAW 4 FREAKY EYES AND STUFF...HEHE. OH MAN YOU ALL ARE FUNNY. TINKERS DAMN THAT 4 EYED WOMAN! STAN YOU WIN THE COOL AWARD FOR ALWAYS STAYING EVEN KEEL AND FUNNY IN YOUR POLITICAL POSTINGS...HEHE

Well, I still clearly remember posting that four-eyed lady pict here on RS quite some time ago, and chuckling when it see that it's now being used as a pop-up ad on many different venues that I post on. I don't see it here in RS, of course, because Community owners are exempt from ads, but I see it on other Yuku Communities, Windows Live, Yahoo, Lefora, and even OEN. However I've never looked at any of the ads closely enough to see who is running them. And I bet if the advertisers knew that, they'd try to figure out some way to send Fundies to stalk me, spouting threats of hellfire and damnation! <G>