PDA

View Full Version : This is the regime the lefties love.



AmazingBrewdini
06-07-2005, 06:02 PM
Fidel Castro is a Hollywood darling. Oliver Stone, Steven Spielberg, and dozens of other celebrities laud and praise the Cuban socialist revolution. Here is a different view of the revolution: (Scroll down and select "Sardinas vs. Cuban Communists")
Freestar (http://www.freestarmedia.com/)

moblsv
06-07-2005, 07:29 PM
Liberal Activists!! How dare they question the government? How unpatriotic.

moblsv
06-07-2005, 07:40 PM
It seems I'm not getting my memo's. When did the "Left" declare their love for the regime?

Gayle in MD
06-08-2005, 03:20 AM
Hi there,
While your doing research, why not look up the Marianna Islands, Tom Dalay, aka Bush's good golf buddy, and the slave labor they support under the false tag of "Made in America" which should be changed to Made In The United States, so that we may know when we purchse items which manufacturers are using slave labor in sweat shops in other parts of the world. B. Republic, Anne Taylor, Levis, The Gap, some of the top clothing companies which sell us clothes made by women who go to the Mariannas thinking they are going to be working under the safety net of American Labor Policies, only to be locked down for weekends, forced to have abortions, inhumane working conditions, and earning $350.00 for a year of work. Guess who assured the top crook manufacturer that the legislation to implement American Labor Laws in the Mariannas would never get on the schedule, good old religeous golf buddy of Bush, Tom D. so called minister of God's work, lol, and majority leader of the culture of life party.

Gayle in Md.

catscradle
06-08-2005, 05:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hi there,
While your doing research, why not look up the Marianna Islands, Tom Dalay, aka Bush's good golf buddy, and the slave labor they support under the false tag of "Made in America" which should be changed to Made In The United States, so that we may know when we purchse items which manufacturers are using slave labor in sweat shops in other parts of the world. B. Republic, Anne Taylor, Levis, The Gap, some of the top clothing companies which sell us clothes made by women who go to the Mariannas thinking they are going to be working under the safety net of American Labor Policies, only to be locked down for weekends, forced to have abortions, inhumane working conditions, and earning $350.00 for a year of work. Guess who assured the top crook manufacturer that the legislation to implement American Labor Laws in the Mariannas would never get on the schedule, good old religeous golf buddy of Bush, Tom D. so called minister of God's work, lol, and majority leader of the culture of life party.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Can't you ever deal with the matter at hand without turning it into an attack Bush fest? The matter at hand is that the Communists regime in Cuba sucks. It sounds like life in the Mariannas sucks too, but start another thread.
What Bush has to do with the Mariannas condition I don't know. I didn't know before your diatribe and I don't know after it since you just rambled on without evidence or a conclusion.
Bush is just another politician, the only problem I find with your attacks is your stating the obvious and it implies other politicians may be more upstanding citizens which they aren't. Basically, all politicians suck, Bush no more than Gore. One just sucks differently than another.

AmazingBrewdini
06-08-2005, 05:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> Liberal Activists!! How dare they question the government? How unpatriotic. <hr /></blockquote>

Hi, and thanks for your response. I would like to discuss the topic with you right here as long as we are both respectful and willing to listen. In short, I would like to discuss it in much the same manner, as I have in the past with very dear and very liberal friends. (BTW-They're still friends)! Maybe we all learn a little? Whatta ya say?

Sound good to you? /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

AmazingBrewdini
06-08-2005, 06:13 PM
Gayle,

I'm puzzled. What does this have to do with the price of peanuts in Peoria?

If you feel a need for a Marianas thread then please by all means start one. But if you do, be prepared to be able to substantiate your allegations.

Now answer me honestly. Did you watch the video? If so, what were your intellectual, emotional, and/or spiritual reactions?

Gayle in MD
06-09-2005, 04:15 AM
I have to be honest with you, I did try to watch it, but couldn't get it to work for me for some reason.

My suggestion to check out what is happening in the Mariannas was obivously in response to the way you titled your post, an inferrence that folks from the left, aka Democrats, are in support of cruel dictatorships. I simply gave you an example of some of the inhumane treatment which is encouraged and supported by the right.

Without seeing the video, (I'll have to figure out why I couldn't get it to work for me) I can only say that if it includes inhumane treatment, I would be repulsed, I'm sure.

Does it include proof that whatever atrocities are shown, are loved by the left? Just thought I'd ask.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
06-09-2005, 05:29 AM
Brewdini I am still amazed at what Conserative and Liberal mean. The last three Con Presidents put us 10 Billion in the hole it took Liberal Bill Clinton to get us out, the Con
G W B put us back in the hole. Someone must give me the true meaning of Liberal and Conservative.####

hondo
06-09-2005, 06:29 AM
I couldn't get it to play either. We've been
mad at Castro since he grabbed the casinos and
threw Joe Kennedy and Meyer Lansky out of Cuba.
We dumped support for him and he tried to turn
to Russia for help. And the beat goes on.

AmazingBrewdini
06-09-2005, 08:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Brewdini I am still amazed at what Conserative and Liberal mean. The last three Con Presidents put us 10 Billion in the hole it took Liberal Bill Clinton to get us out, the Con
G W B put us back in the hole. Someone must give me the true meaning of Liberal and Conservative.#### <hr /></blockquote>

There is no one true meaning. Consider this: a lot of conservatives see ourselves as the true inheritors of what is known as "classical liberalism".

Adam Smith proposed the theory that individuals could structure their moral and economic lives without intervention from the state, and that the strongest nations would be those which left individuals free to pursue their own initiatives. Adam Smith was the initial proponent of the principle of "laissez faire" -- minimal governmental intervention in the functioning of the free market. Smith developed a theory that attempted to reconcile human self-interested nature with unregulated social order (The Theory of Moral Sentiments -- 1759). His best known work ,The Wealth of Nations explained how an unregulated market would naturally regulate itself via aggregated decisions on the part of individuals.

Contrast the above with the current philosophical leadership of the Democratic Party ( a party which has chosen to mortgage it's soul to Soros and his far left socialist inspired, MoveOn.org).

Understand this..I'm not saying that all Democrats are bad and that all Republicans are good. That would be simplistic and moronic. But unless and until the Democrats cut loose their seeming addiction to the far left they will not gain traction amongst the rank and file , indeed they will continue to alienate and thus hemorrhage supporters.

Gayle in MD
06-10-2005, 08:56 AM
Does this mean that you don't think that the right has an agenda to interfere with our moral and economic lives?

Gayle in Md.

AmazingBrewdini
06-10-2005, 08:42 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> I have to be honest with you, I did try to watch it, but couldn't get it to work for me for some reason.

<font color="blue"> You need to download Macromedia Flash Player 7 </font color> Macromedia Download Center (http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer/). <font color="blue">It's free, and works automatically as needed.
</font color>
My suggestion to check out what is happening in the Mariannas was obivously in response to the way you titled your post, an inferrence that folks from the left, aka Democrats, are in support of cruel dictatorships.

<font color="blue"> No, not really. Your statement however, implies that leaning leftward is required of all Democrats.FYI There are such creatures as Democratic conservatives, IOW, some Democrats are right of center.

FWIW, my post was aimed at hollywood celebrities who go to Cuba and are treated to the best of the best of everything, then go do the obligatory tours and serve as vocal propaganda assets for a regime which subjects its own citizens to apartheid. In the old days they used to call it prostitution, but today it's called ho'ing.</font color>

I simply gave you an example of some of the inhumane treatment which is encouraged and supported by the right.

<font color="blue">The "right" is composed of millions of individuals. Smearing an entire class of humans as inhumane brutes should be anathema to any true liberal.. n'est ce pas? I submit to you that leftists have been responsible for the greatest acts of inhumanity, genocide, and mass murder this world has known. Oh, and of course let's not forget their contributions as merchants of squalor. </font color>

Without seeing the video, (I'll have to figure out why,I couldn't get it to work for me) I can only say that if it includes inhumane treatment, I would be repulsed, I'm sure.

<font color="blue">I hope you do see it, it certainly is worth watching. </font color>

Does it include proof that whatever atrocities are shown, are loved by the left? Just thought I'd ask.

<font color="blue">You are free to draw your own conclusions. </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

AmazingBrewdini
06-10-2005, 08:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Does this mean that you don't think that the right has an agenda to interfere with our moral and economic lives?

<font color="blue">Do you think that the left does not have such an agenda? Really Gayle, you make me chuckle sometimes. </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
06-11-2005, 06:07 AM
Really, you make me laugh out loud! You title a post, "This is the regime the lefties love" and then deny your obvious intention, which is to smear the humane intentions of Democrats.

My example and invitation to you to learn about the whoreing practices of the republican majority leader, and how he supported the atrocities in the sweat shops of the Marianna Islands, you totally ignore. He has the support of his party, and particularly Bush, but they continue to try to change the law, in order to prevent any accountability, the usual republican tactic.

Compare what is happening in the Marianna's, to the actions of a few hedonistic hollywood stars. To attribute the travel of those "Lefties" as you call them, is an action which IMO, proves that if either of us needs to perform statistical annalysis of the two parties, it is you.

You might want to start by looking into the tax cuts which have made the top one thenth of the top one percent in this country incredibly richer, while the middle class and lower middle class is struggling, and all economists of independent organizations agree that the tax cuts which Bush and the republicans have applied have hurt the poor and middle class, and given the richest the greatest financial boost they have had in ninety years.

To demand accountability for the lies, and atrocities of this administration, which is a patriotic responsibility of those who love this country, is now labeled by the right as non support of our troops.

There are much more important and critical issues to be examimed regarding this administration, than what a "Few" hollywood starts do in their leisure, IMO, such as a president who wants to make his tax laws for the rich, permanent, at a time when Allan Greenspan acknowledges that the raging deficit created by this administration is now at extremely worrisome levels, and the only way out, is through raising taxes, and cutting spending, two things which the republican leadership refuse to do accept in ways which worsen the conditions of the most financially challenged in our country.

You want a good look at atrocities, take a good look at republicans.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
06-11-2005, 06:22 AM
Smearing an entire class of humans as inhumane brutes, is precisely what you did in your title of your post. Also, for you information, Adam Smith believed in tax structures which favored guidelines according to "Ability to pay" so I suggest you re-read his works, and then make a comparison to what has happened economically among the various income levels in this country. Many see us as slipping into European class structure, with a huge chasm between the rich and the poor and middle class.

Again, you ignore the statement made in the title of your post and its insinuation, and then dismiss it with, "You are free to draw your own conclusions."

Again I suggest you look into the "whore" who is the majority leader of the republican party, for a real and true example of what you insinuate of the "left" in your post.

Gayle in Md.

AmazingBrewdini
06-11-2005, 05:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Really, you make me laugh out loud! You title a post, "This is the regime the lefties love" and then deny your obvious intention, which is to smear the humane intentions of Democrats.

<font color="blue">I see you still have trouble with your reading comprehension skills. Your statement is so ridiculously absurd that it boggles the mind. Could you please explain the logic supporting your conclusions above? </font color>

My example and invitation to you to learn about the whoreing practices of the republican majority leader, and how he supported the atrocities in the sweat shops of the Marianna Islands, you totally ignore. He has the support of his party, and particularly Bush, but they continue to try to change the law, in order to prevent any accountability, the usual republican tactic.

<font color="blue"> Give me one credible source for information to back up your allegations. Is that too much to ask? Or am I obligated to accept everything you say as true, without any need on your part to substantiate it?

Facts are:

a.) You never saw the video in question, so you cannot make any informed comments on the merits or lack thereof of same.

b.) You jump in with wild allegations about slave labor in the Marianas without offering anything to back up your claims. (Indeed IMO, you did so in order to try to blow smoke up people's tushes).

</font color>

Compare what is happening in the Marianna's, to the actions of a few hedonistic hollywood stars. To attribute the travel of those "Lefties" as you call them, is an action which IMO, proves that if either of us needs to perform statistical annalysis of the two parties, it is you.

<font color="blue">I don't have to compare anything. The topic was and is the struggle of the Cuban dissident movement to advance the Varela Project, and how cynical and worthless Hollywood lefties serve as shills for the very same government that oppresses the Cuban people and has forced them to live in a system of economic apartheid. I don't give a flying rat's rump about discussing the Marianas in this thread. Like I said before you want to discuss the Marianas? Fine by me. Start another thread and post till your fingers fall off for all I care. </font color>

You might want to start by looking into the tax cuts which have made the top one thenth of the top one percent in this country incredibly richer, while the middle class and lower middle class is struggling, and all economists of independent organizations agree that the tax cuts which Bush and the republicans have applied have hurt the poor and middle class, and given the richest the greatest financial boost they have had in ninety years.

<font color="blue"> Again, this has nothing to do with the topic. </font color>

To demand accountability for the lies, and atrocities of this administration, which is a patriotic responsibility of those who love this country, is now labeled by the right as non support of our troops.

<font color="blue">Perhaps because you behave as an automaton when it comes to your political views, you cannot conceive of anyone else not doing likewise in regards to their own views. To you everything is black or white, it is this small mindedness which blinds you to the multitude of shades of gray that exist. </font color>

There are much more important and critical issues to be examimed regarding this administration, than what a "Few" hollywood starts do in their leisure,

<font color="blue">Perhaps, but not in this thread. Now either get on topic or politely butt out. </font color>
&lt;snip&gt;

Gayle in Md.
<hr /></blockquote>

AmazingBrewdini
06-11-2005, 06:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Smearing an entire class of humans as inhumane brutes, is precisely what you did in your title of your post.

<font color="blue">Nonsense. I do however stand by my assertion that leftist regimes have murdered more human beings than any other regimes. Read "The Black Book of Communism" (published by that hotbed of extreme right wing ideology known as "The Harvard Press"). </font color>

Also, for you information, Adam Smith believed in tax structures which favored guidelines according to "Ability to pay" so I suggest you re-read his works, and then make a comparison to what has happened economically among the various income levels in this country. Many see us as slipping into European class structure, with a huge chasm between the rich and the poor and middle class.

<font color="blue">


Of the Sources of the General or Public Revenue of the Society

PART 2

Of Taxes

THE private revenue of individuals, it has been shown in the first book of this Inquiry, arises ultimately from three different sources: Rent, Profit, and Wages. Every tax must finally be paid from some one or other of those three different sorts of revenue, or from all of them indifferently. I shall endeavour to give the best account I can, first, of those taxes which, it is intended, should fall upon rent; secondly, of those which, it is intended, should fall upon profit; thirdly, of those which, it is intended, should fall upon wages; and, fourthly, of those which, it is intended, should fall indifferently upon all those three different sources of private revenue. The particular consideration of each of these four different sorts of taxes will divide the second part of the present chapter into four articles, three of which will require several other subdivisions. Many of those taxes, it will appear from the following review, are not finally paid from the fund, or source of revenue, upon which it was intended they should fall.

Before I enter upon the examination of particular taxes, it is necessary to premise the four following maxims with regard to taxes in general.

I. The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. The expense of government to the individuals of a great nation is like the expense of management to the joint tenants of a great estate, who are all obliged to contribute in proportion to their respective interests in the estate. In the observation or neglect of this maxim consists what is called the equality or inequality of taxation. Every tax, it must be observed once for all, which falls finally upon one only of the three sorts of revenue above mentioned, is necessarily unequal in so far as it does not affect the other two. In the following examination of different taxes I shall seldom take much further notice of this sort of inequality, but shall, in most cases, confine my observations to that inequality which is occasioned by a particular tax falling unequally even upon that particular sort of private revenue which is affected by it.

II. The tax which each individual is bound to pay ought to be certain, and not arbitrary. The time of payment, the manner of payment, the quantity to be paid, ought all to be clear and plain to the contributor, and to every other person. Where it is otherwise, every person subject to the tax is put more or less in the power of the tax-gathered, who can either aggravate the tax upon any obnoxious contributor, or extort, by the terror of such aggravation, some present or perquisite to himself. The uncertainty of taxation encourages the insolence and favours the corruption of an order of men who are naturally unpopular, even where they are neither insolent nor corrupt. The certainty of what each individual ought to pay is, in taxation, a matter of so great importance that a very considerable degree of inequality, it appears, I believe, from the experience of all nations, is not near so great an evil as a very small degree of uncertainty.

III. Every tax ought to be levied at the time, or in the manner, in which it is most likely to be convenient for the contributor to pay it. A tax upon the rent of land or of houses, payable at the same term at which such rents are usually paid, is levied at the time when it is most likely to be convenient for the contributor to pay; or, when he is most likely to have wherewithal to pay. Taxes upon such consumable goods as are articles of luxury are all finally paid by the consumer, and generally in a manner that is very convenient for him. He pays them by little and little, as he has occasion to buy the goods. As he is at liberty, too, either to buy, or not to buy, as he pleases, it must be his own fault if he ever suffers any considerable inconveniency from such taxes.

IV.

<font color="red">Every tax ought to be so contrived as both to take out and to keep out of the pockets of the people as little as possible over and above what it brings into the public treasury of the state. A tax may either take out or keep out of the pockets of the people a great deal more than it brings into the public treasury, in the four following ways. First, the levying of it may require a great number of officers, whose salaries may eat up the greater part of the produce of the tax, and whose perquisites may impose another additional tax upon the people. Secondly, it may obstruct the industry the people, and discourage them from applying to certain branches of business which might give maintenance and unemployment to great multitudes. While it obliges the people to pay, it may thus diminish, or perhaps destroy, some of the funds which might enable them more easily to do so. Thirdly, by the forfeitures and other penalties which those unfortunate individuals incur who attempt unsuccessfully to evade the tax, it may frequently ruin them, and thereby put an end to the benefit which the community might have received from the employment of their capitals. An injudicious tax offers a great temptation to smuggling. But the penalties of smuggling must rise in proportion to the temptation. The law, contrary to all the ordinary principles of justice, first creates the temptation, and then punishes those who yield to it; and it commonly enhances the punishment, too, in proportion to the very circumstance which ought certainly to alleviate it, the temptation to commit the crime. Fourthly, by subjecting the people to the frequent visits and the odious examination of the tax-gatherers, it may expose them to much unnecessary trouble, vexation, and oppression; and though vexation is not, strictly speaking, expense, it is certainly equivalent to the expense at which every man would be willing to redeem himself from it. It is in some one or other of these four different ways that taxes are frequently so much more burdensome to the people than they are beneficial to the sovereign.
</font color>

The evident justice and utility of the foregoing maxims have recommended them more or less to the attention of all nations. All nations have endeavoured, to the best of their judgment, to render their taxes as equal as they could contrive; as certain, as convenient to the contributor, both in the time and in the mode of payment, and, in proportion to the revenue which they brought to the prince, as little burdensome to the people. The following short review of some of the principal taxes which have taken place in different ages and countries will show that the endeavours of all nations have not in this respect been equally successful.

</font color>

Again, you ignore the statement made in the title of your post and its insinuation, and then dismiss it with, "You are free to draw your own conclusions."

<font color="blue"> Are you not free to draw your own conclusions? Should I call Little Bushie and have him send in the Marines to free you from the aliens that are controlling you? </font color>

Again I suggest you look into the "whore" who is the majority leader of the republican party, for a real and true example of what you insinuate of the "left" in your post.

<font color="blue"> You don't know Jack about the post. You did not see the video, you have no idea what it deals with, and as usual you are spouting off at the mouth without a clue. </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

eg8r
06-11-2005, 10:06 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Again I suggest you look into the "whore" who is the majority leader of the republican party, for a real and true example of what you insinuate of the "left" in your post. <hr /></blockquote> Basically, the way I see it, is that he is ignoring this and you can make a new thread discussing the majority leader. You are trying to change the subject. Whether every single politician is guilty of this does not matter as far as this thread is concerned. Brew decided to discuss only this one instance. You are deflecting this and trying as hard as possible to get the Majority leader in the discussion.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
06-14-2005, 05:15 AM
Could you please define for me your own definition of Left? Are you suggesting in this post that democrats are communists? Since I have such a serious problem with reading, maybe you can explain. You speak of Leftist Regimes now, but before you were referring to Hollywood stars are Leftists. Don't you think those are two different things?

I would like to see Cuba liberated from dictatorship. Can we atleast agree on that? As far as Hollywood Stars are concerned, frankly I don't put much value on anything they say or do. It's hard enough to keep up with the lies and atrocities being committed right here in the United States Senate and Congress. Notice, I am not suggesting any particular party, as, although the one in power is currently the one in need of scrutiny, this changes according to which party is in the majority. I have changed my party affiliation several time over the course of my life, FYI.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I am waiting to learn your definition of "Lefties" before I respond to your accusations. You give me no examples of the murderious actions of which you speak, nor of exactly to whom you attribute them. The words, left, leftist, etc. can have many meanings these days.

Also, please notice that when I write to you, I don't accuse you of being an automaton, or attack your reading ability. Since many of the things I posted about years ago on this forum have, over time, been proven to be true, I don't think I have any problem reading, in fact, I wish the right would read a few books. They could start with Bob Woodward, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neil, for the proof that Bush, Cheney, Rice, all lied, for example, which has now been documented in the British memo. Now, the right says, Oh well, so what, the President always lies to us about what the reasons are for going to war, and YOU call ME an automaton?

Here's my definition of an automaton, a person who thinks that there were no atrocities committed in Vietnam by any of our troops, and who threatens and slanders anyone who says they were told by personal friends who served in Vietnam about atrocities. Now, that's an automaton.

Gayle in Md.

Chopstick
06-14-2005, 06:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote AmazingBrewdini:</font><hr>

<font color="blue"> Are you not free to draw your own conclusions? Should I call Little Bushie and have him send in the Marines to free you from the aliens that are controlling you? </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

http://floridasportsman.com/art/lol.gif http://floridasportsman.com/art/toast.gif http://floridasportsman.com/art/lol.gif

AmazingBrewdini
06-14-2005, 07:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Could you please define for me your own definition of Left?

<font color="blue">OK. To me, "leftist" refers to those who belong to or support the political left, irrespective of the degree to which they tilt to the left of center. Now having said that, in practical terms however, my usage of the term "leftist", "lefty", and so on, is meant to describe the more radical, more cunning, and infinitely more dangerous, radical elements.
</font color>

Are you suggesting in this post that democrats are communists?

<font color="blue">No, but some (quite a few)are sympathetic. Let's examine some facts:

a.) The Democratic Party is heavily dependent on MoveOn.org (George Soros). Mr. Soros emigrated from Hungary and made a bazillion dollars. Apparently, at some point in time,presumably in fit of angst and guilt over his amassed fortune, Mr. Soros embraced Socialism,and One-World Government, so he bought the Democratic Party to serve as the vehicle for his lofty aspirations. A spokesperson for MoveOn.org itself has gone on record as stating "We bought the Democratic Party, and now we own it."

b.) The Democratic Party has a potent, vocal, activist and self declared Socialist Caucus. This is a fact, the evidence is all there and it cannot be disputed.

</font color>
Since I have such a serious problem with reading, maybe you can explain.

<font color="blue">I'm sorry. That was a cheap shot on my part. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif
</font color>
You speak of Leftist Regimes now, but before you were referring to Hollywood stars are Leftists. Don't you think those are two different things?

<font color="blue">Yes and no. Yes they are two separate entities, but they become unified when they act in concert. It seems logical to me to assume that leftist celebrities, or leftist candlemakers, for that matter would seek to provide a measure of aid and comfort to other leftist entities ( i.e. regimes).

The most egregious, brazen, and classic example of this in our times are the shameful acts of high treason,by Jane Fonda. I and millions of others, will never forgive her, and feel she should have done some real hard time for her crimes.</font color>

I would like to see Cuba liberated from dictatorship. Can we atleast agree on that?

<font color="blue">Coooool! Talk to me baby! Talk to me! /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif
</font color>

As far as Hollywood Stars are concerned, frankly I don't put much value on anything they say or do.

<font color="blue"> But can we agree that, for propaganda purposes, celebrities are a potent force? </font color>

It's hard enough to keep up with the lies and atrocities being committed right here in the United States Senate and Congress. Notice, I am not suggesting any particular party, as, although the one in power is currently the one in need of scrutiny, this changes according to which party is in the majority. I have changed my party affiliation several time over the course of my life, FYI.

<font color="blue">I would welcome a change in leadership if the Democrats became more centrist. My greatest fear is that the Democratic Party will implode. That cannot happen! Think of the consequences. I was once proud to be a Democrat. (Guess that make me a neo-con.) It would thrill me to no end to see the party take its head out of its butt and realize what precisely is at stake here.

</font color> Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

<font color="blue"> Precisely. </font color>

I am waiting to learn your definition of "Lefties" before I respond to your accusations. You give me no examples of the murderious actions of which you speak, nor of exactly to whom you attribute them. The words, left, leftist, etc. can have many meanings these days.

<font color="blue"> See my response above.
</font color>
Also, please notice that when I write to you, I don't accuse you of being an automaton, or attack your reading ability. Since many of the things I posted about years ago on this forum have, over time, been proven to be true, I don't think I have any problem reading, in fact, I wish the right would read a few books.

<font color="blue">Again I apologize. I shall refrain from such utterances in the future. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif
</font color>
They could start with Bob Woodward, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neil, for the proof that Bush, Cheney, Rice, all lied, for example, which has now been documented in the British memo. Now, the right says, Oh well, so what, the President always lies to us about what the reasons are for going to war, and YOU call ME an automaton?

Here's my definition of an automaton, a person who thinks that there were no atrocities committed in Vietnam by any of our troops, and who threatens and slanders anyone who says they were told by personal friends who served in Vietnam about atrocities. Now, that's an automaton.

<font color="blue"> Atrocities were committed in Viet-Nam, by both sides. This does not excuse such conduct by either party.

No one who has ever seen the Life magazine coverage of My Lai (sp?)can ever forget them.
</font color>
Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
06-14-2005, 11:53 AM
Whatever you may think of Jane Fonda, regardless of how many times she has apologized for sitting on the tank, she made the American people realize that they were being lied to, and in turn prevented bombings in Vietnam of dikes which
would have drowned thousands and thousands of innocent women and children. Also, there were thousands and thousands of Vietnam Veterans who stood shoulder to shoulder with her in her efforts to stop the war. Those of us who have the courage to demand accountability from our leaders, are the true patriots.

I can't speak to your allegations regarding Moveon.org. I am not familiar with Mr. Soros, or his political aspirations. Are you familiar with Rupert Murdoch, of Fox News?

I am not a lover of politicians, but I certainly don't think democrats are communists. Nor do I think that those of us who are and were against Bush's War are unpatriotic. Nor do I think that those of us who acknowledge war atrocities are slandering our troops if what we say is true. Nor do I subscribe to the philosophies of the extreme right, or left.

What I would like to see is an Independent Party which embraced the needs and desires of the common man, the middle class, the working class, and the true principles of democracy. I don't find a tax structure which favors the rich among us to be what democracy is about. Do you?

Gayle in Md.

AmazingBrewdini
06-14-2005, 01:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Whatever you may think of Jane Fonda, regardless of how many times she has apologized for sitting on the tank, she made the American people realize that they were being lied to, and in turn prevented bombings in Vietnam of dikes which
would have drowned thousands and thousands of innocent women and children. Also, there were thousands and thousands of Vietnam Veterans who stood shoulder to shoulder with her in her efforts to stop the war. Those of us who have the courage to demand accountability from our leaders, are the true patriots.

<font color="blue">Treason | U.S. Constitution
Article III. Section 3. Clause 1.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

"She committed treason. She exploited and misused American POWs. She gave the North Vietnamese Communists, with whom we were then at war, propaganda - that American POWs endured unimaginable torture not to give them - she gave it to them for free. And, indeed, she caused the deaths of American fighting men and the deaths of our allies as well." - Henry Mark Holzer, co-author of "Aid and Comfort: Jane Fonda and North Vietnam" on MSNBC's "Scarborough Country".

"We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war, and that she would struggle along with us." - Bui Tin, Colonel, People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN).

"Our loses were staggering and a complete surprise. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for reelection." - Bui Tin, Colonel, People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN).

"There is no statute of limitations on a capital crime, which treason is." - Attorney and author Henry Holzer.

"I once said that if Jane Fonda had been a citizen of the Soviet Union, she would have been put up against a wall and shot." - Steve Dunleavy, "Blame This On Jane", New York Post, June 18, 1998.

"If you go by the letter of the law, and I have the treason definition here in the criminal code right in front of me, it does seem that Jane Fonda did commit treason against this country, even if she disagreed, as you did, against the Vietnam War policy, because she did give aid and comfort to the enemy. So if she did commit treason, should she pay some kind of price?" - Bill O'Reilly question to Tom Hayden on The O'Reilly Factor.

[Why Jane Fonda was not prosecuted for treason] "I found out why they didn't. It's in the book. And the reason they didn't is because of the memory of Mr. Hayden's caper in Chicago at the so-called Chicago 7 trial. And I have a quote in the book, which says that the Justice Department, and this is shameful, the Justice Department was afraid of her."
--- "Nixon was trying to shut down the war. Nixon was running for re-election. And they were afraid. And this is a direct quote from somebody involved in that process: 'We were afraid she, read that, she and her lawyers and guys like Hayden, would make a monkey of us.'" - Henry Holzer of HanoiJane.net answer to Bill O'Reilly with Tom Hayden listening on The O'Reilly Factor.

"If someone were to come forth and denounce me a traitor a little ink will be spilled until the time I am executed as one. On the other hand, if it were a celebrity such as Jane Fonda, the proceedings will be decried as a 'witch hunt'." - Phil Surgent, Overbrook, Pennsylvania, in Pittsburg Tribune-Review Sports, May 17, 2001.

"Jane Fonda never was charged, but as far as I'm concerned she committed treason. I think most families who lost kids in Vietnam would agree. What happened to her? Nada. - Steve Dunleavy, 'CELEBS THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH MURDER' Tue Feb 26, 2:48 AM ET', NYPost.com (Feb. 26, 2002).

"A scant 30 years after she visited North Vietnam to side with the men who were storing American soldiers in cages, Jane Fonda has apologized for her treason, found Jesus and will soon be teaching Him aerobics." - Dennis Roddy, Pittsburg Post Gazette, March 02, 2002.

"Fonda was a filthy traitorous rat and remains so. If she was so enamoured of the Vietnamese Communist political system, why does she continue to live in the West and suck a parasitic existence from the regime she claims to abhor?"

</font color>
I can't speak to your allegations regarding Moveon.org. I am not familiar with Mr. Soros, or his political aspirations. Are you familiar with Rupert Murdoch, of Fox News?

<font color="blue"> Rupert Murdoch is an outspoken conservative tycoon who controls a vast mutinational media empire.

FWIW, everything I wrote about Soros and MoveOn.org are matters of public record and can be easily googled.</font color>

I am not a lover of politicians, but I certainly don't think democrats are communists. Nor do I think that those of us who are and were against Bush's War are unpatriotic. Nor do I think that those of us who acknowledge war atrocities are slandering our troops if what we say is true. Nor do I subscribe to the philosophies of the extreme right, or left.

<font color="blue">I would not qualify myself as an extreme right winger. I have a fair streak of Libertarianism in me.
</font color>

What I would like to see is an Independent Party which embraced the needs and desires of the common man, the middle class, the working class, and the true principles of democracy.

<font color="blue">It would be great if such a party actually existed and were guided by a principled and dedicated leadership. But alas, it does not.
</font color>

I don't find a tax structure which favors the rich among us to be what democracy is about. Do you?

<font color="blue">No, but I don't believe in soaking the rich either. Not every problem in America can be blamed on the "greedy rich". </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Qtec
06-14-2005, 01:38 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Not every problem in America can be blamed on the "greedy rich".
<hr /></blockquote>

So you are saying that most problems can be blamed on the greeedy rich?

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Gayle in MD
06-14-2005, 05:08 PM
As regards Ms. Fonda, we don't agree, and for every pundit you google and quote, I could find another who has a different point of view.

As for the tax structure, I recommend "Perfectly Legal" by Pulitzer Winning Author David Cay Johnston, where you will find proof that all things considered, the tax structure of the Bush Administration is heavily weighted toward the rich in this country. The government won't release the data, so Mr. Johnston, whose expertise, a tax expert, performed his own computer data. A tax structure based on the ability to pay is the most conservative idea in Western civilizaion, progressive taxation, which is what gave birth to democracy. Mr. Johnston uses a picture of the Golden Gate Bridge, the high left point representing the wealth of the rich in the 1920's, and high right point representing the wealth of the rich since 2002.

For the forward thinking, most of the grave problems which will face America in its future, will be linked to the greedy rich, the special consideration shown them by Bush, and his failure to organize a strategy for securing Iraq once occupied, and exiting in a reasonable amount of time.

For more information, see David Phillips, former Sr. State Department Advisor who resigned the Future Of Iraq Project, over the Fiasco in Iraq, his book titled, "Losing Iraq" Inside the Post War Reconstruction Fiasco,

which documents how the Bush administration threw out the extensive plans of 17 Federal Agencies, thousands of pages, hundreds and hundreds of individual Iraqis advice, and millions in taxpayers money, because the information proved the difficulties and odds regarding his insistance on occupying Iraq.

Documented in the book also is how Iraqis would have been emboldened to handle regime change on their own, had the weapons inspections process been allowed to continue. Sound unreasonable? It isn't.

All due respect, I don't get my information from Google.

Gayle in Md.

DebraLiStarr
06-14-2005, 06:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> As regards Ms. Fonda, we don't agree, and for every pundit you google and quote, I could find another who has a different point of view.

As for the tax structure, I recommend "Perfectly Legal" by Pulitzer Winning Author David Cay Johnston, where you will find proof that all things considered, the tax structure of the Bush Administration is heavily weighted toward the rich in this country. The government won't release the data, so Mr. Johnston, whose expertise, a tax expert, performed his own computer data. A tax structure based on the ability to pay is the most conservative idea in Western civilizaion, progressive taxation, which is what gave birth to democracy. Mr. Johnston uses a picture of the Golden Gate Bridge, the high left point representing the wealth of the rich in the 1920's, and high right point representing the wealth of the rich since 2002.

For the forward thinking, most of the grave problems which will face America in its future, will be linked to the greedy rich, the special consideration shown them by Bush, and his failure to organize a strategy for securing Iraq once occupied, and exiting in a reasonable amount of time.

For more information, see David Phillips, former Sr. State Department Advisor who resigned the Future Of Iraq Project, over the Fiasco in Iraq, his book titled, "Losing Iraq" Inside the Post War Reconstruction Fiasco,

which documents how the Bush administration threw out the extensive plans of 17 Federal Agencies, thousands of pages, hundreds and hundreds of individual Iraqis advice, and millions in taxpayers money, because the information proved the difficulties and odds regarding his insistance on occupying Iraq.

Documented in the book also is how Iraqis would have been emboldened to handle regime change on their own, had the weapons inspections process been allowed to continue. Sound unreasonable? It isn't.

All due respect, I don't get my information from Google.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Hey guys.. listen... lets post something fun!!! This garble is depressing. I'd prefer FL to this crap!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Really!!!

Now I'll start with the first fun message of this thread.. ready???
Here goes....
http://www.artcorestudios.com/images/retarded.jpg

theinel
06-15-2005, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DebraLiStarr:</font><hr>Hey guys.. listen... lets post something fun!!! This garble is depressing. I'd prefer FL to this crap!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Really!!!<hr /></blockquote>
A voice of reason shines through!

DebraLiStarr
06-15-2005, 02:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote theinel:</font><hr>
A voice of reason shines through! <hr /></blockquote>

Not really... I just got bored reading the same old dragging argument that's going on in 4 other threads. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

AmazingBrewdini
06-16-2005, 10:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DebraLiStarr:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote theinel:</font><hr>
A voice of reason shines through! <hr /></blockquote>

Not really... I just got bored reading the same old dragging argument that's going on in 4 other threads. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

<font color="blue">With all due respect Debra, if you are not interested in the subject matter of any particular thread then you are free to ignore it.

I find your comments to be rude and out of line. You can post all the inane, juvenile, and sophomoric, drivel you want to post, that is certainly OK by me, but let others discuss whatever they want to discuss. Fair enough? Perhaps you need to go to the "naughty spot" for a spell?</font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

DebraLiStarr
06-17-2005, 11:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote AmazingBrewdini:</font><hr>
<font color="blue">With all due respect Debra, if you are not interested in the subject matter of any particular thread then you are free to ignore it.

I find your comments to be rude and out of line. You can post all the inane, juvenile, and sophomoric, drivel you want to post, that is certainly OK by me, but let others discuss whatever they want to discuss. Fair enough? Perhaps you need to go to the "naughty spot" for a spell?</font color> <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> HEY BREWDINI..... </font color>

http://www.geocities.com/dli41075/bmoon.gif