FA+
Shop
1461
Views
Views
51
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / All
Species Kaiju / Giant Monster
Size 821 x 330
File Size 118.3 kB
Report this content
★
More from rabbi-tom
Listed in Folders
RIP Hugo Chavez , ABOUT TIME!!
News has broke that the great dictator of the Socialist world, Hugo "El Magnifico" Chavez finally has pined for the Fjords.
HE IS AN EX-PRESIDENT!!!
Nope, never cared for the dictator/asshole, and the world is better off without him!!
HE IS AN EX-PRESIDENT!!!
Nope, never cared for the dictator/asshole, and the world is better off without him!!
Category All / All
Species Kaiju / Giant Monster
Size 821 x 330px
File Size 118.3 kB
Hugo Chavez has been supplying free heating oil to over eight million low income households for over six years since the Bush administration cut LIHEAP budget by 25%. Now that Chavez is dead, it's doubtful now that aid will continue. I expect the death toll next winter to be in the hundreds, if not thousands.
Be very careful what you wish for. You might get it.
Be very careful what you wish for. You might get it.
I have. My parents grew up poor. My grandparents grew up poor on a plantation. But I've not once heard them telling me that they were on wellfare. I'm poor. I'm on government-subsidised heathcare. (Emergency care is ok, vision and dental completely sucks.) If I wasn't living at home, I'd be on the street, when I should be living on my own and employed!
My life is pathetic.
I think I do know something about it.
My life is pathetic.
I think I do know something about it.
Yes, you know *something* about poverty. But not enough. You have a roof over your head, you are not starving, you HAVE some healthcare, and even a computer and Internet connection. By the standards of 80% of the population of this planet, you are filthy rich.
I'm not defending the departed b*tard dictator, mind you, Good riddance. But there is a reason why these populists gain power on socialist slogans. When you are hungry, cold, have no chance of any medical help even in an emergency (tough luck - either you will survive on your own or die on the street), your children have no shoes at all and no chance to attend any school, then promises of free stuff have quite a bit of appeal.
If you are on a government-subsidized healthcare, then apparently you are OK with getting free stuff, too. Just food for thought,
Sorry for flying off the handle, but I grew up behind the Iron Curtain. I remember times when meat, sugar and gas were rationed (not that too many people owned a car, anyway). I remember standing in queue in front of the shop for 2-3 hours in December to be able to buy a kilo of oranges, in order to have something special for the Christmas table. And yet this was still far from poverty as I understand it - I had a roof over my head, electricity, heating (most of the time), water, some clothes (hideous but complete and clean) and was not hungry.
I'm not defending the departed b*tard dictator, mind you, Good riddance. But there is a reason why these populists gain power on socialist slogans. When you are hungry, cold, have no chance of any medical help even in an emergency (tough luck - either you will survive on your own or die on the street), your children have no shoes at all and no chance to attend any school, then promises of free stuff have quite a bit of appeal.
If you are on a government-subsidized healthcare, then apparently you are OK with getting free stuff, too. Just food for thought,
Sorry for flying off the handle, but I grew up behind the Iron Curtain. I remember times when meat, sugar and gas were rationed (not that too many people owned a car, anyway). I remember standing in queue in front of the shop for 2-3 hours in December to be able to buy a kilo of oranges, in order to have something special for the Christmas table. And yet this was still far from poverty as I understand it - I had a roof over my head, electricity, heating (most of the time), water, some clothes (hideous but complete and clean) and was not hungry.
If you are on a government-subsidized healthcare, then apparently you are OK with getting free stuff, too. Just food for thought,
I do not see is as "being Ok with it". It is a simple matter of necessity; either this, or pay thousands of dollars that I don't have to pay for trips to the ER, removing a rotten wisdom tooth, filling cavities, replacing a busted pair of eyeglasses (which I almost had to pay for), repairing another busted tooth (Medicaid won't cover root canals or caps, only pullouts or fillings). And I do know what it's like to have tp pay for meds without insurance, it nearly cleared me out. But I suppose with Obamacare being the law of the land now, it probably doesn't matter anymore anyway, and my argument here is moot.
I'm not defending the departed b*tard dictator, mind you, Good riddance. But there is a reason why these populists gain power on socialist slogans. When you are hungry, cold, have no chance of any medical help even in an emergency (tough luck - either you will survive on your own or die on the street), your children have no shoes at all and no chance to attend any school, then promises of free stuff have quite a bit of appeal.
That was how Hitler came into power. He was elected for thoese reasons. But there does come a point when "Benevelant Dictators" cease to give things way, and start taking things away. "Power corrupts and great men are almost always bad men."
Yes, you know *something* about poverty. But not enough. You have a roof over your head, you are not starving, you HAVE some healthcare, and even a computer and Internet connection. By the standards of 80% of the population of this planet, you are filthy rich.
Sorry for flying off the handle, but I grew up behind the Iron Curtain. I remember times when meat, sugar and gas were rationed (not that too many people owned a car, anyway). I remember standing in queue in front of the shop for 2-3 hours in December to be able to buy a kilo of oranges, in order to have something special for the Christmas table. And yet this was still far from poverty as I understand it - I had a roof over my head, electricity, heating (most of the time), water, some clothes (hideous but complete and clean) and was not hungry.
Yes, the poor in America are considerably better off than those in the rest of the world. And I do know a little, but not nearly enough for myself to claim to be an expert (but a lot better it seems than most of our Hollywood celebrities, including those who seem to have forgotten where they came from). Also, as you yourself grew up under the philosophy that Chavez followed, you know well that it, at least is no better than Capitalism, but not as great as the propaganda machine has lauded it to be. There has always been poverty, ever since the dawn of Civilization, and there always will be, long after they end. That will never change.
"The inherent vice of Capitalism is unequal sharing of blessings; the virtue of Communism is equal sharing of miseries" -Winston Churchill
[Bows gaciously] I concede to your agument.
I do not see is as "being Ok with it". It is a simple matter of necessity; either this, or pay thousands of dollars that I don't have to pay for trips to the ER, removing a rotten wisdom tooth, filling cavities, replacing a busted pair of eyeglasses (which I almost had to pay for), repairing another busted tooth (Medicaid won't cover root canals or caps, only pullouts or fillings). And I do know what it's like to have tp pay for meds without insurance, it nearly cleared me out. But I suppose with Obamacare being the law of the land now, it probably doesn't matter anymore anyway, and my argument here is moot.
I'm not defending the departed b*tard dictator, mind you, Good riddance. But there is a reason why these populists gain power on socialist slogans. When you are hungry, cold, have no chance of any medical help even in an emergency (tough luck - either you will survive on your own or die on the street), your children have no shoes at all and no chance to attend any school, then promises of free stuff have quite a bit of appeal.
That was how Hitler came into power. He was elected for thoese reasons. But there does come a point when "Benevelant Dictators" cease to give things way, and start taking things away. "Power corrupts and great men are almost always bad men."
Yes, you know *something* about poverty. But not enough. You have a roof over your head, you are not starving, you HAVE some healthcare, and even a computer and Internet connection. By the standards of 80% of the population of this planet, you are filthy rich.
Sorry for flying off the handle, but I grew up behind the Iron Curtain. I remember times when meat, sugar and gas were rationed (not that too many people owned a car, anyway). I remember standing in queue in front of the shop for 2-3 hours in December to be able to buy a kilo of oranges, in order to have something special for the Christmas table. And yet this was still far from poverty as I understand it - I had a roof over my head, electricity, heating (most of the time), water, some clothes (hideous but complete and clean) and was not hungry.
Yes, the poor in America are considerably better off than those in the rest of the world. And I do know a little, but not nearly enough for myself to claim to be an expert (but a lot better it seems than most of our Hollywood celebrities, including those who seem to have forgotten where they came from). Also, as you yourself grew up under the philosophy that Chavez followed, you know well that it, at least is no better than Capitalism, but not as great as the propaganda machine has lauded it to be. There has always been poverty, ever since the dawn of Civilization, and there always will be, long after they end. That will never change.
"The inherent vice of Capitalism is unequal sharing of blessings; the virtue of Communism is equal sharing of miseries" -Winston Churchill
[Bows gaciously] I concede to your agument.
"At least is no better than Capitalism" must be an understatement of the decade. Having lived through this train wreck personally, I would never in my life vote for Socialists. And I sometimes wish that somebody would take all the theorists from Western universities, who from the safety of their ivory towers praise the communism and criticise the system which gave them all their comforts, pack them into cattle wagons and send them to North Korea for one month of holidays in one of the labor camps to experience the "workers' paradise" firsthand.
What I want to say, however, is that there is no real black and white. Many socialists have their hearts in right places, and I am certainly attracted to ideas of equal chanves and protection for the weakest members of the society. That said, socialism and communism do not take into account some very basic human traits, and because of this, every attempt to introduce it will inevitably ruin the economy, wreck the collective psyche of the society for generations and open the door wide for all kind of potential dictators. Even if they try to do things right, it will end up wrong
I'll end up with two more quotes:
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." - Ronald Reagan
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money [to spend]." - Margaret Thatcher
What I want to say, however, is that there is no real black and white. Many socialists have their hearts in right places, and I am certainly attracted to ideas of equal chanves and protection for the weakest members of the society. That said, socialism and communism do not take into account some very basic human traits, and because of this, every attempt to introduce it will inevitably ruin the economy, wreck the collective psyche of the society for generations and open the door wide for all kind of potential dictators. Even if they try to do things right, it will end up wrong
I'll end up with two more quotes:
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." - Ronald Reagan
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money [to spend]." - Margaret Thatcher
I made less than $3,000 last year. And it was a prosperous year for me. I help with a food bank that hands out food for the hungry and the homeless, two things I *have* been. I can barely afford my food, but I do not take food stamps. My fuel is severely rationed (I ride a motorcycle) but I get where I need to go. I will not see a doctor unless it is life and death (See my blog about the screwdriver going through my finger, and into the bone of another. Didn't see a doctor.) and I DO NOT WANT OBAMACARE. I'd rather live life like a fucking MAN than want something that burdens the majority of hardworking Americans so *everyone* can have shitty healthcare.
I get all riled up just thinking about it.
I get all riled up just thinking about it.
maybe you've been keeping up on the War On Poverty, which started in 1964 under a Democrat, LBJ.
49 years later, Trillions of dollars redistributed, and poverty levels are virtually unchanged.
you cannot redistribute people out of poverty.
Giving people stuff won;t help them in the long run, it'll only make them dependent on that help
the Nasty Little Secret is that the Democrats Know This, and want to Keep it so.
(sent to you because coelacanth1938 has me on their block list)
49 years later, Trillions of dollars redistributed, and poverty levels are virtually unchanged.
you cannot redistribute people out of poverty.
Giving people stuff won;t help them in the long run, it'll only make them dependent on that help
the Nasty Little Secret is that the Democrats Know This, and want to Keep it so.
(sent to you because coelacanth1938 has me on their block list)
Chavez only played Robin Hood when it suited him. He did it for PR and to buy votes in his own country. He really just wanted power. Look what George Washington and the presidents after him achieved without needing to be in power indefinitely or bypassing the checks and balances they had originally agreed to. Chavez wanted to build a dynasty and one man rule. That was his goal. Handouts was just one way to get there. Once he had total control, he would forget about the poor, just like other dictators throughout history.
Yet people don't learn. They see freebies and like rats to cheese they come, not seeing the trap until it snaps around their neck.
Yet people don't learn. They see freebies and like rats to cheese they come, not seeing the trap until it snaps around their neck.
Maybe you should ask whose opinions really matters. People who lived under that regime. A lot of them have little good to say about Chavez. A truly great leader would have helped the poor within the term limits. He removed them. Even if for sake of argument he meant well he has died suddenly leaving a power vacuum and anyone could fill it and have no term limits and a strong one man grip on power. This person could be good, or more likely they would be like what we see in the middle east and north korea.
Also its funny seeing you go on about a "bunch of rich people". Most of those who suffered were not rich and maybe not dirt poor but small business owners. Have you ever even had to build a small business or saved and invested to elevate yourself from "the poor" to something a bit better or have you just been living on handouts and the goodwill of others all your life?
There is a big difference between teaching people to build something better and just flinging money and food their way to buy votes.
Also its funny seeing you go on about a "bunch of rich people". Most of those who suffered were not rich and maybe not dirt poor but small business owners. Have you ever even had to build a small business or saved and invested to elevate yourself from "the poor" to something a bit better or have you just been living on handouts and the goodwill of others all your life?
There is a big difference between teaching people to build something better and just flinging money and food their way to buy votes.
Coelacanth, you're a bit of an enigma to me. You're a Browncoat, a firefly fan. And you support socialism, which if you pay any mind to firefly the government in it is an overly oppressive socialistic based group. Hugo Chavez also had death squads, and kicked out oil companies who had invested billions of dollars into his nation and employed thousands of workers so his people could take them over. When he did take over the people in charge can barely run them up to the speed the oil companies could have. Also when you're trying to keep your people from revolting you'll give them things to keep them placated and needing you for support, in other words you make them addicted to you so that without you you suffer for being free from under them.
His method is like that of an abbsusive lover who keeps you out of work and controls you with shelter and food being taken away the moment you question their actions. He also was insane, he had his own TV show which he would talk for hours with a captive studio adudiance about how great he was. Personally he didn't die soon enough.
His method is like that of an abbsusive lover who keeps you out of work and controls you with shelter and food being taken away the moment you question their actions. He also was insane, he had his own TV show which he would talk for hours with a captive studio adudiance about how great he was. Personally he didn't die soon enough.
Dude, I'm using the United States as my yardstick to measure the Hugo Chavez regime. One of the most under reported news stories of the previous decade was American oil companies calling in the aid of Delta Force to "sanitize" oil drilling platforms in Nigeria of striking workers.
Pots shouldn't call kettles black.
Pots shouldn't call kettles black.
"2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person's credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. "liberals," "hippies," "progressives" etc. This form of argument - if it can be called that - leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass." --- 14 Propaganda Techniques Fox News Uses To Brainwash Americans
You never did answer my question. But like many of the lib media you avoid the questions asked. This will likely divert into a circular argument but I'll concede the idea our government does things that are likely bad, but also likely need to be done. Huga Chavez did these things for himself and not for his people to propel his socialistic ideas, As for fox news hiding or discrediting, all major media does that to opposing view points.
He cannot. His kind skims the state run media for juicy sound bites and throws the unending weight of his emotions behind it, making it thusly "true". (Notice the quotes) Armed with this psychological (But not foundational, and especially not factual) reinforcement, he is able to argue all manner of outright halftruths and all out lies to the death. You cannot win, because logic has no doorway to his psyche- as emotion is completely clouding it. I know because I used to be just like this. Until hard, cold, shitty reality slapped me in the face.
It's funny you still never answered the questions I asked, and you continue to give grade school level. You say I'm in a caged by ignorance when you revel in it, and if you read my earlier posts I don't quote Fox News and have even said all the news companies discredit opposing view points in their own interests. Back to the base of this little line of comments. Hugo Chavez was even reported on by CNN and MSNBC as piece of trash.
You are aware that Chavez was a wahack job conspiracy nut who allowed his cronies to pin problems on the Jews, especially Henrique Capriles Radonski who ran against Chavez in the 2012 elections even though he is a practicing Catholic. Dictators will only resort to doing good things for certain people to keep others from turning their eyes towards the real problems.
There's always someone. If there's a gap in the list of corrupt megalomaniacs, someone WILL rise to fill it. It's simple human nature. For every "bad guy" who meets his end, timely or otherwise, a replacement is waiting in the wings.
That's why I don't feel much satisfaction in seeing tinpot dictators and religious wingnuts bite the bullet. People like that are a dime a dozen, and tomorrow there'll be a new nutcase champing at the bit.
That's why I don't feel much satisfaction in seeing tinpot dictators and religious wingnuts bite the bullet. People like that are a dime a dozen, and tomorrow there'll be a new nutcase champing at the bit.
Not all of them are brainwashed, a good portion hated him. Supposedly not enough of them voted to get him out. I repeat supposedly, some think he fixed it to stay in. They didn't have a chance...Chavez ran an unfair campaign against the opposition.
NOW they have a chance to get someone decent in there.
NOW they have a chance to get someone decent in there.
I know people hated him, but we all were excited for a new government change on the last elections,and that didnt happen. I hope now in the next elections people will do the right thing. And yeah, that could be easily manipulated, nto to mention he made things harder for those venezolanos living in the US by switching the voting office to a farther city.
Last year, President Obama said that Chavez wasn't any great threat to the States. I wonder if he knew something, saw something, that we didn't, a leaked medical report perhaps?
Still, that didn't stop some commentators on the Right from accusing Obama of being weak, foolish, etc. Didn't Obama realise Chavez was in league with Iran, etc etc?
Maybe those same commentators will apologise to Obama now? Maybe when a squadron of swine orbits a blue moon while Chavez sings 'Mammy', they will.
Still, that didn't stop some commentators on the Right from accusing Obama of being weak, foolish, etc. Didn't Obama realise Chavez was in league with Iran, etc etc?
Maybe those same commentators will apologise to Obama now? Maybe when a squadron of swine orbits a blue moon while Chavez sings 'Mammy', they will.
Comments