posted January 14, 2009 09:00 PM            

quote:

---

Koiflower and sunshine_lion, I don't know how long you've frequented GU but the same thing happened a while back

---

Eleanore - you may not care what I have to say, but I have only just found your reply. VDI has the right to post whatever she wants within guidelines and to express her opinion. I express mine, too. My opinion is that Venus posts threads along with "putdowns" - that being anti-women.

I don't like putdowns, especially on women who have had to take the whip on their back throughout hundreds of cultures over thousands of years. This behaviour needs to be diverted into a more positive light, such as, helping women to overcome depression, rather than punishing them for it.

posted January 15, 2009 12:02 AM              

quote:

---

Koiflower

Oh you again, with aggressive negative put-downs of another culture.

Where do you get your information from?

Does this mean western cultures should not donate to needy countries anymore because we are so depressed and apparently full of stupid women?

Slion

she was fed oppressive lies as so not to ever even think about wanting those kinds of rights, after all look how it has impacted our society. whack upside the head.

little did she know they did not expect activism from her after feeding her lies about the western culture.

someone taught her this to keep her down.

---

Talk about throwing sh1t on the wall hoping it'll stick

Thanx for parading your OWN ignorance and arrogance to prove ME right.

Third world girls exist to be looked down upon not to be argued logically with right ?

Because they are oppressed...never mind i have TWO college degrees down the line and am working on the third in San Jose..YUP right here in the liberal Sh1thole...

Ahh...the oppressive parents who sent me all the way here...

posted January 15, 2009 12:08 AM              

quote:

---

I appreciate that elenore. I just saw the movie slumdog millionaire and it showed so much about life in india, it was quite sobering and humbling considering my defensive approach to vdl. I certainly should have been less lazy and more proactive in creating a real picture of life here and feminism as it has affected our culture.

I think if I took the time to research more and spout off less, I would be a much better debator.

some say live and learn I prefer to learn and live.

peace

---

Lets make one thing claer, the kind of kids you saw in the film exist right here in the US thanx to feminism and in India more and more kids are availing the benefits of family stability and getting into better lifestyles.

quote:

---

My opinion is that Venus posts threads along with "putdowns" - that being anti-women.

---

aww...KOI honey, anti women ???

Dont you really mean Anti- Liberalised women ?

Absoultely infallible logic you have for taking back my freedom of speech - this is how strong liberal women are - when confronted with your own reality - question the very credibility of the one who makes you confront your ideology.

she is either dumb to question you or tooo WEAK to not agree with you.

posted January 15, 2009 12:35 AM              

Given the visa restrictions i can only do an internship in an export house - filled with fat, lesbo-ish liberal women.

All they do in the work hours is b1tch,b1tch,b1tch -- My BF said balblabla ..si i said blablabla..then he said blablabla then I said blablabla...

Soon i think this export house like others who dont want their productivity driven down by the dead , bloated weight of these women will outsource ...

Femmie exhibit A - B1tchy Supervisor .

On being told i am soon to be married to a boy my parents are hunting for...

"" Awww sweetty you are too young, you need to concentrate on your careerr honey, tell your fiance to wait ,i would rather dump him, if he wasnt willing to wait for me , ..a girl needs to play the field ""

Righto, so basically i am weak because i am marrying in the peak of my physical beauty and fertlity rather than being a free fcukdoll for every bad boy in every bar in Silicon Valley.

Moving on to Exhibit B

My future if i listen to my Liberal Boss...

32 year old , single mom with 3
b@stards from some 500 bad boys of the tri-state area . Perenially depressed, dateless living with parents.

Last wednesday found her crying at lunch hour surrounded by the other ladies consoling her. See, her geeky friend from high school who had always had a thing for her - only she found it rather exciting to be fcuked and chucked by bad boys rather than be treated like a lady by the geek ..

Well he had stayed in touch with her because he still cared for her and she was saving him as a reserve since high school - back when her breasts werent sagging and she was 100 pounds lighter.

This geek is now an executive with a big home and stable life - the kind she thought she could always have when SHE was " ready " - i.e. after fcuking enough bad boys.

Enter an evil, horny s1ut who is half her size and age - and the boring geek is now lavishing his Love AND money on her . Giving her a stable life and family, which was what the skank with the b@stards was thinking SHE was " Entitled " to..

And the best part..like so many white men the 18 yr old beauty was an Asian virgin who didnt care about being treated like a toy by bad boys to feel sexually empowred. She didnt play any games and the LOSER has given her a huge diamond....

Call the the Liberal Feminsts now - we must pass the laws to put that submissive, thirdworld chink in her place.

Its not the fault of the overweight, wrinkly single mom with b@stards, hoping a decent man will be a husband, be her ticket out of the hell SHE has created for her sons...

No.. its the oppressed asian s1ut who stole the man - she an ageing wh0re with a million miles on her pUssy was " ENTITLED " to.

All he had to do was wait for her to be done " Playing the field " ..

Right , Madam Supervisor , sure i will play the field.

And be a fat ageing hag, no man with a great life will take for a wife when he can have
someone half my age .

Then i will buy a bunch of cats and expect the Government to take care of an empowered Woman , something my family would have done , only its weak and oppressive right ???

i have one thing for any sad looking single mom with b@stards in tow -

" Hey cheer up grl , at least the last d1ck was good "

Cruel me, women ar meant to have equal rights not equal responsibilites for the repercussions of their decisions - STUPID.

An empowred women is one who messes up her life to feel empowered and then her femmie sisters pass laws so she doesnt have to be responsible for the responsibilities.

posted January 15, 2009 04:18 AM            

Here is what I actually said

quote:

---

Now, if you disagree with what VDI's posts are saying, I don't really care.

---

My concern was with the way the subject was approached. Which I've gone over in other posts.

Expressing a negative opinion of a group is not against any guidelines. For example, if you want to say Christians are so brainwashed they are a threat to reasonable people, you can say that. And people do say things like that, all over this site. So far as I know, racist comments, even generalized, are off limits. Now, if any poster directly attacks another poster here, then that is against the guidelines.

For my part, I think the best way to divert behavior into a positive light is to do so by example. Which was what I stated originally. Ie, and inevitably repeating myself, if anyone thinks VDI's information is inaccurate, wouldn't it be more positive to present more accurate information instead of questioning her cultural background? And,as previously stated, it isn't just this thread to which I was referring.

It reads like this, "Hey, you third world Indian, what could you possibly know about life in the US? You think you're an expert on us? I pity your ignorance." (Reads like this does not equal a direct quote.) How is that a positive approach? And the reason I bring it up is that this situation has happened in reverse already. Or, "how can you ignorant Americans comment on my middle eastern country like that? You need to worry about your own problems and stop with the racist and xenophobic behavior". And I'm actually laughing because of the party lines making this seem like something it isn't.

No, I don't agree that putting down women or men is a good thing. Yes, I think depressed people need help. I think anyone with a mental disorder needs help. However, and I've seen this topic creep up in other threads, I don't think any mental illness is an excuse for illegal behavior, such as, say, murder. "Not guilty by reason of insanity" is a load of crap, imo, and though I don't believe those people should be sent to prison or executed, I do believe they should incur a life sentence in a mental institution for their crimes.

Anyway, I do wonder, if the title is "Why are Liberal Feminists HYPOCRITES?" why everyone assumes that VDI is targetting all feminists. Or is it that conservatives cannot possibly be feminists? (I know no one will see the irony in putting down a whole group there by omission but, well, c'est la vie.)

posted January 15, 2009 07:32 AM              

quote:

---

Perhaps you should take a drive up to Marin. Have a look around. It might do you some good.

Of course a trip to Louisiana might do the trick, too.

---

Cant

posted January 15, 2009 07:47 AM              

quote:

---

PS I don't think all the material VDI has posted is true or valuable. I think certain situations have been isolated and exaggerated into representing a larger group than is accurate. But, those isolated cases are, imo, really sad and I see no reason why they cannot be reasonably addressed by both sides.

---

I have faced everything from Patronising behaviour to open insults for beingn a Conservative feminist.

When i was working for welfare groups i8n Mumbai , the feminist workers at the centres where i offered free healing workshops insulted me for not thinking all men are pigs to be shot at verbally or that marriage is a conspiracy and women who choose family are victims

Who here appreciates being told they are brainwashed for the choices they make for their own happpiness ?

And ONE simple question for women who throw rape and other statistics in every discussion to make out that men - universally are enemies to ALL women by virtue of their gender .

Does the fact that some men ARE perpetrators automatically give all women the right to be inhumane to ALL men and think of themselves as morally superior ?

Create Laws that promote alienation among the genders , among families ?

Whatever the noble intentions of a few early feminists the fact remains that the laws created to promote so called equality were in fact created to destroy the family system - as Andrea Dworkin and other feminists openly claimed was their goal .They went on record to say if left to them women should not be allowed to choose to get married and have children

This is a FACT.

most early feminists were either openly or secretly affiliated with Socialist political groups . The only way , in the 60 's for Socialism to make it roots in US was through feminism - which is disguised socialism , only its among the sexes.

How do i know ?

They did that in Russia, women had to dig trenches, because they had to live the equal part of the deal. The breakdown of families brought a mighty empire down with it.

Its amazing when a group claims it wants equality and then lobbies for laws that are outright biased against men and families.

Its ridiculous when a group claims women are equal to men and then lobbies for reservations in employment ?

Its outright damning when a group claims women are equal to men and lobbies to get a mother who kills her kids free from any punishment because she is a WOMEN .

Hysterical , when they say the sexes are EQUAL and go onto to worship women for their gender and denigrate men for their gender .

posted January 15, 2009 08:20 AM            

Why are you so aggressive toward women?

posted January 15, 2009 01:29 PM              

vdi - I am sorry you are such an angry woman. I feel terrible that you are from an oppressed country. I am sorry that you accept abuse from men as normal and I actually pity you. I am very sorry for you.

to call me names is really inappropriate and also against the rules you scroll by every time you enter this site.

It was humbling to me to see that movie, because knowing how life is portrayed in your country and the things I have read lately about your country have humbled me, made me realize how totally blessed and fortunate I am to live this life I live, with the freedoms I have and the opportunities that I take for granted.

I understand your anger to a point.

Setting you straight requires more effort than I have energy.

koi - it isn't worth it. let her rant and believe what she likes, namecall and nastiness included. Lets just be grateful that our circumstances are not thus.

I was quoted out of context and was speaking to elanore, but it really doesn't matter. She can believe what she likes, true or not.

Our energy is wasted here.

you can obtain 20 degrees and never have wisdom. I also have two degrees. big whip. wisdom is choosing your battles wisely, and there is no wisdom in argueing with a mad dog. they just bite.

posted January 15, 2009 03:16 PM              

Liberal Position Paper - 1
Liberalism
Minoo Masani
The word "Liberalism" derives from liberty. In other words, the individual is in the centre of the picture. Society is there to serve the individual and not the other way round as certain other systems of thought like communism or socialism try to make out.

The essential elements of Liberalism are all-pervasive and touch every aspect of life. Insofar as matters of the spirit are concerned, tolerance, particularly tolerance of dissent, is basic. Whether an issue is religious, communal, regional, national or pertains to small groupings like caste and linguistic groups, tolerance of the other point of view and willingness to argue about it are of the essence of Liberalism.

Insofar as religion is concerned, Liberalism is not anti- religious but it is non-denominational and perhaps sceptical. A good Liberal does not attack all religions equally as a 'secularist' would do. A good Liberal would tolerate and respect all religions equally. In that sense, Gandhiji's attitude to religion was much more liberal than that of those who call themselves 'secular' and who look at all religions with an equally malevolent eye. The Indian Constitution is, in that sense highly liberal and extends equal respect to all religions and religious institutions.

Pragmatism
Another basic characteristic of Liberalism is its pragmatic approach to whatever problem there may happen to be at aparticular time. The Liberal does not approach any problem with a dogmatic or preconceived attitude. He is open-minded on all issues. Thus, for instance, in so far as democratic socialism is concerned, the Liberal would be quite prepared to accept a large dose of State control as the circumstances of a particular country, case and time may warrant. While holding the view that competition, consumer preference and the laws of the market should predominate, the Liberal is flexible about the exact nature of the mixed economy which would be desirable in a particular context.

Pluralism
The Liberal is of necessity a pluralist, that is, he does not accept the predominance of any one line of thought or dogma or even one class of society. In the Liberal's mansion, there are many chambers and there is room for everything. The Liberal, therefore, believes in a pluralistic society where there are checks and balances between different organs of government, such as the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. In a federal form of government, there have also to be checks and balances between the federal government on the one side and the state government on the other. In the case of countries with multi-religious, multi- ethnic and multi-lingual groups, such as India, the Liberal believes in the protection of the rights of
the minorities. In the conflict between the individual and the state, there should be fundamental rights for the citizens with an appeal to the Courts of Law. There should be a separation of political and economic power. In other words, the Liberal believes in limited government. ‚Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's. God, in this case, is the conscience of the individual.

The Liberal is never a determinist. He never says that such and such a thing is bound to happen, as does the Marxist. All he can say is that, on the basis of arational analysis, certain things are likely to result if certain things happen.

Justice And Modernity
The Liberal stands for justice for the underdog, whoever he may be. Thus, he is for equality of women with men, though he may not be for Women's Lib with all its aberrations. The Liberal stands up for the rights of children and decent treatment for them. So too, the Liberal pleads for sympathy for the criminal and the odd man out.

The Liberal is a modernist. He is an advocate of change. He welcomes and cheerfully accepts modern technology with all its implications. He stresses the role of managerial skills in industry and business and other walks of life. He accepts the importance of science in modern society. It is not an accident that technology only thrives in freedom and, where freedom is denied to the scientist and technologist, there is stagnation.

In the conflict between modernism on the one side and obscurantism, whether that of the nation, caste or religion on the other, the Liberal is on the side of modernism and change. The Liberal is not against tradition. On the contrary, the Liberal respects what is good in the tradition of people and seeks to build and change on the basis of the tradition. In that sense, the Liberal is not an incendiary or disrupter but a constructive element of change.

"Bread Or Freedom?"
The Liberal rejects the false antitheses between freedom and bread which the communists and the fascists always pose. They ask: is Do you want bread or freedom's As if we have to choose the one or the other. As if, when you have freedom, you don't have bread or, to have bread, you must give up your freedom? Now this is a huge hoax. Because, actually you don't get bread except through freedom. There is no known instance in human history where a country of slaves get bread. Now, by bread, we don't mean only bread. By bread we mean the good things of life - thematerial values of life, consumer goods, as we call them. There is no known example in human history till this day where, by denying people freedom, you give them a prosperous life. On the contrary the 'Affluent Society' comes only where there is maximum freedom.

Which are the countries where you have the most bread, to put it like that, that is, the best time? Obviously, the U.S.A. leads, freedom, you take away their bread also. That is natural. Why should slaves be well fed? Why should any government feed its slaves well? The Egyptians, who used slave labour to build pyramids, did not treat them well. They flogged them until they built the Pyramids and died in the process. It is only the free man who has a right to ask for bread. Because he has the right, he has got the strength, he has the vote, whatever you like to call it.

A Free Economy
A free economy therefore means that government has to play a rather limited and restricted part. Social control must be limited to a minimum. The whole idea of control is to interfere with people when something is going wrong. You stop a man from stealing, you stop a man from hitting somebody else, you stop a man from cheating somebody else, you stop an employer from cheating his worker - that is fair. But you don't stop a man from doing something which he should be doing. So controls are only police measures to stop somebody from doing something he should not. The government should not be like the mother who told the nanny:le Mary, go and see what Johnny is doing and tell him not toln! Johnny should only be stopped when he is really doing something which he shouldn't.

The second characteristic of a free society is that i.the consumer is kinglm. Everything must be done to serve the needs of the consumer, not of the industrialist, not of the businessman, not of the factory worker, but of the man who consumes, because he is the ordinary citizen. We all consume. There is not a single human being in India today who doesn't consume. He would be dead if he didn't. We consume, you consume, our children consume. Now what does iothe consumer is kinglm mean? It means that the consumer must determine the pattern of production. The consumer must tell the industrialist what to produce and what not to produce. The consumer can do this by his purchasing power, by the little money in his pocket. The industrialist or businessman only produces what he thinks will make a profit. In other words, if there is a demand for a commodity, you produce it. If there is no demand, you are a fool if you produce it because nobody will buy it and you will lose your capital. In this way, the smallest consumer can determine the pattern of production in a free country.

Every time we go shopping, we cast a vote. As you buy a ticket to back a horse, so you go to a shop and say iaI want Hamaml. or irI want Lirill., or whatsoever it is. You cast a vote for that particular brand of soap against another brand, just as you vote for the Congress Party and not for me, or just as you back one horse and not another. Now, all these preferences for soaps and perfumes, for bread and biscuits and cakes, and whatever else you like, are totalled up on the economic tote and, by looking at the economic state, the business community and industrialist decide what is popular, what is favoured. They shift their production according to the demand.

That is what consumer being king means. It has led to the highest prosperity known in history, the highest standard of life and also of equality of opportunity and status. This is a paradox. The countries where there is greatest equality - there is nowhere perfect equality, nor can there be - but wherever there is equalityof opportunity and of status, it is in the capitalist countries. Which is the country in the world where the worker calls his boss by his first name? The American worker never call his boss Mr. so and so. He always says Tom or John. That is the United States. People in Europe are shocked at this kind of ifvulgarityl. or lack of good breeding because they are still class bound. So you get this strange phenomenon that you get not only the most prosperity but also the greatest measure of equality, which is supposed to belong to socialism, only in so called capitalist, or what I call liberal countries.

Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, the very intelligent Prime Minister of Singapore, who is a socialist came to Bombay to meet Indian socialists some years ago and he asked a question of them.
He said: "It is pertinent to ask how is it that in Asia, countries like Japan, Hongkong, Formosa, Thailand and Malaysia, which are bustling free enterprise economies, have achieved success, while countries professing Socialism have failed to produce satisfactory results?"

Prof. Kenneth Galbraith, who was American Ambassador in Delhi and who was an ardent socialist and planner in Mr.Nehru™s time wrote a book called The New Industrial State. This is what he writes in this book:

"In India and Ceylon, and also in some of the new African countries, public enterprises have not, as in Britain, been accorded autonomy. Here the democratic socialist prerogative has, in effect, been fully asserted. India, in particular, has a legacy of colonial administration, has an illusion of official omniscience which extends to highly technical decisions... The effect in these countries of this denial of autonomy has been exceeding inefficiency in operations by the public firms... In India and Ceylon, nearly all public-owned corporations operate at a loss. The situation is similar in other new countries... One result is, that a large number of socialistshave come to feel that public corporations are by their nature, in the words of a minister in the Wilson Government, ‚remote™, irresponsible bodies, immune from public scrutiny or democratic control".

The reason why this should be so is very simple. The body politic is like our own bodies. It consists of organs developed by society over the last few thousand years since we were primitive apes or beasts. Now as human society develops, it throws up institutions. The Joint Stock Company has been thrown up in the last two hundred years to run business. The Government or State has been thrown up to rule, to maintain order. Our bodies are like that. We smell through our nose, we eat through our mouth, we hear through our ears, we breathe through our lungs, we digest in the stomach and so on. Now what would happen if we tried to distort our organs and asked them to do something different from what they were meant to do. Supposing we tried to breathe through our stomach and digest with our lungs or hear through the nose and smell with the ear? What would happen? It just wouldn't work. That is exactly what happens when we try to misuse an organ of society. Governments were thrown up by society and civilisation to protect the country from attack, to stop one person from attacking another, to see that justice is done. In other words, governments are there to keep law and order, do justice, protect people, protect the country from attack. That is where the basic functions of government stop. When government tries to run a factory and to produce either penicillin or steel or whatever it is, it makes a flop because governments are not made to make profits or to produce goods. Governments are not made to produce anything. Governments are meant to consume things, to keep order and give you a chance to produce. So State Socialism and Communism are a perversion of the laws of social growth. Therefore, they are bound to fail. The conclusion to which one is driven then is that we have got to turn to Liberalism from this barren path.

The Old Liberalism
Liberalism is making a beginning in India. But this is not the first time that Liberalism has come to India. It came in the 19th century also. There was the old liberalism in India. Its leaders were Dadabhai Naoroji, Ranade, Gokhale, Ram Mohan Roy, Surendra Nath Bannerjee, whose names you know. I saw many of them when I was a boy or a student, attending lectures of Srinivasa Shastri. I remember as a boy playing around the feet of Dadabhai Naoroji at Versova where he was a neighbour of ours. I have seen Dinshaw Vachha. I saw Pherozeshah Mehta. I knew Sapru and Jayakar. They have all gone and the old Liberalism has gone also. It was killed by Mahatma Gandhi. When Gandhiji came on the scene as a dynamic nationalist following Tilak and Lajpatrai, he had no use for the old Liberalism, because the old Liberals were extremely moderate in their opposition to British rule. They were for Indian self-government. As you know, Dadabhai Naoroji coined the word Swaraj. But the method of fight was very temperate and very moderate. He joined the British Parliament as a Liberal Member. He argued for India, but was a constitutionalist. Liberals are not people who go to the streets, wreck things, attack people and so on. Even today, they are not. So, being constitutional, they appeared to be terribly moderate. As a young man, I was extremely impatient with my father and liberals of that type for being so slow and gentle about the evil of foreign rule.

Nationalism
Even today, I am not against nationalism. I have been a very ardent nationalist in my time. But when we become free, we don't need nationalism any more. It is like the measles. When you grow up, you don't have children's diseases like chickenpox and measles. Nationalism is a disease of foreign rule. When somebody is sitting on your chest, you want independence very ardently. You can't breathe without freedom and that is as it should be. But whenyou are free, you don't have to go on talking about your nationalism. Mature, advanced countries are not very nationalistic. They don™t need it. Go to Switzerland. They are a very patriotic people, but they don't talk about Switzerland being the most wonderful country in the world! They are wonderful, but they don't talk about it. So, as we grow up, there is no need to be juvenile about nationalism. Of course, love of the country must be there. When the country is attacked, we must rush to its rescue. We must make sacrifices for it every day. But we don't want to be chauvinists. We don't have to hate foreigners. We don't have to throw out missionaries. Nationalism, while a good thing, has had its day. We can afford to relax on nationalism.

Ends And Means
Socialism has failed to deliver the goods. It has produced neither equality nor a better life for the masses of the people. The aims of socialism are good: I am still a socialist in that sense. If you put it to me: ieDo you believe in Lenin's ‚free and equal society™ io I will say 'yes'. If freedom and equality are the objectives of socialism, I am for it. But when I find that the weapon that I have used does not create freedom or equality, but creates tyranny and slavery on the one side and inequality and poverty on the other, then I would be a fool if I stuck to that weapon. I am not that conservative that I cling to an out-of-date blunderbuss when the weapon has become obsolete. What I am trying to say is, that the objectives of socialism are still valid, but the methods are lousy. The methods have failed. State planning, nationalisation, collective farming, these are weapons that have been tried and failed and only a stupid man hangs on to a weapon when he knows it can't deliver the goods. We have to be true to the objective, not true to the method.

This I learnt from Mahatma Gandhi with whom I used to argue as a young socialist. He kept on saying that by doubtful methods, you can't gel a good end. Ends and means are meshed,interlinked. The end does not justify the means. We have seen from experience that we cannot gel the good result of a free and equal society by injustice, by regimentation, by oppression, by lies.

The New Liberalism
So the new Liberalism has come to India after the failure of socialism. It is a fusion of western Liberalism and Gandhi. When the Swatantra Party was formed and I was drafting its programme, that is how I put it in an article in Life magazine - that two streams of thought had gone into the making of this effort, Western Liberalism as they understand it plus the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi.

What are these teachings that we graft on to Liberalism or fuse with Liberalism. First, that ends and means are interlinked; that if want a decent society our methods must be decent. We cannot create a free and equal society by expropriation, liquidation, lying as the communists claim they can. Secondly, as Gandhiji overnment. The essential thing is to leave the people free. Thirdly, Trusteeship, that those who have the good things of life, those who have wealth must use them for the good of the community. While we have a good time with what we have, we must not be devoid of a social conscience or a sense of social obligation. Gandhiji called it Trusteeship of the rich for the poor. He said: let every rich man use his wealth. Certainly, let him keep it. Nobody should take it away. But let him use it so that he can have a good conscience that he is doing what he can for those around who are not so fortunate.

Now democracy has its disadvantages. I am not starry eyed about democracy. I realise its limitations, its corruption, its deficiencies. Winston Churchill was a great democrat. He was asked a question about democracy towards the end of his life. He had tasted both the fruits and bitterness of democracy. He hadbeen in political exile for many years before World War II. He was brought in during World War II, and then he was put back on the scrap heap when World War II was over. This is how democracy works. It is just as well. We in this country don't place our great men on the scrap heap and that is why we are going down. After giving a little thought, Churchill said: iaOf all the known systems of government, democracy is undoubtedly the worst - except for all the othersle! That great Liberal in Asia, Carlos Romulo was once heckled by some communist students, in the University of which he was President, who asked him for a declaration of policy. They asked: is Mr. President, are you going left or right?ln Romulo answered: "I am going forward" That is the essence of Liberalism. Neither left nor right, but right ahead.

and of course I wonder how many of my hard earned tax dollars are paying for her education here in this country, where we take the down trodden and give them opportunities for higher education.

Classic example of biting the hand that feeds you.

I am sure you know and realize how very fortunate you are VDL, to have the ability to take advantage of your education here abroad and yet have the freedoms while here to attack our society and the members of it and not be punished as we would be in your country. How very generous of us to allow that.

I would prefer all of my tax dollars to go to the dirty ***** you speak about and feed and educate thier children than to see one damn dime of my money toward an education of the next activist/terrorist from a third world country who would like nothing more than to see our country suffer. We are generous and very foolish to support this.

humanitarian efforts. hhhmmmm...
vdl has one valid point, we should indeed help our own first and make sure they all have the opportunity to attend college way before letting someone who actually spews hate for us utilize our resources and then feel like they have the right to hate and complain about what we have provided for them.

this article outlines how we would never have the freedoms in india that she so blatantly flaunts here where she is safe and secure to spew venom and hate.

SAFETY AND SECURITY: There is a high threat from terrorism throughout India and terror attacks are a serious and growing threat to U.S. citizens traveling and resident there. U.S. citizens are urged to always practice good security, including maintaining a heightened situational awareness and a low profile. Coordinated terror attacks in Mumbai in late November 2008 targeting areas frequented by Westerners have raised the risk of Americans becoming intended or unintended victims of terrorism in India. Because the locations of the attacks have included luxury and other hotels, trains, train stations, markets, cinemas, mosques, and restaurants in large urban areas, it is becoming more difficult to modify one’s behavior to lessen the growing risk. The media attention of and public reaction to the Mumbai attack could possibly prompt other terrorist incidents. Future attacks may also target public places frequented by Westerners, including in large cities and tourist areas such as Goa.

Examples of terror attacks in major cities include the following that have killed over 600 people:

November 2008: Coordinated terrorist attacks on luxury hotels, Jewish community center, restaurant, train station, hospital and other facilities frequented by foreigners in Mumbai killed over 170, including six Americans,
October 2008 Multiple bombings in markets and government offices in Guwahati, Assam,
September 2008: Five deadly explosions in New Delhi markets,
July 2008: Thirty bombs detonated in Bangalore, Karnataka and Ahmedabad, Gujarat as well as multiple un-detonated bombs found in Surat, Gujarat,
May 2008: A coordinated series of bombings in market and temple areas of the tourist city of Jaipur, Rajasthan,
December 2007: An attack on a government paramilitary facility in Uttar Pradesh,
November 2007: Coordinated blasts at court facilities in three cities in Uttar Pradesh,
November 2007: A blast in a cinema hall in Punjab,
August 2007: Two explosions at a popular park and restaurant in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh,
May 2007: An explosion at the main mosque in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh,
February 2007: The detonation of explosive devices on a train northwest of Delhi,
September 2006: A series of explosions at a mosque and cemetery in Malegaon,
July 2006: Seven simultaneous attacks on Mumbai commuter trains,
March 2006: Simultaneous attacks on a train station and places of worship in Varanasi,
October 2005: Simultaneous attacks on several markets in New Delhi.
Terrorist incidents, including those in which American citizens were injured, also occur frequently in more remote parts of India. Generally, the attacks have taken place during the busy evening hours in markets and other crowded places but could occur at any time. Americans in India should be vigilant about security at all times. Americans are advised to monitor local news reports, vary their routes and times in carrying out daily activities, and consider the level of security present when visiting public places, including religious sites, or choosing hotels, restaurants, entertainment and recreation venues. Specific areas of concern are addressed below under "Areas of Instability."

A number of anti-Western terrorist groups (some of which are on the U.S. Government's list of foreign terrorist organizations) are active in India including, but not limited to, Islamic extremist groups such as Harakat ul-Mujahidin, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e Tayyiba, and Harkat-ul-Jihad-i-Islami.

Beyond the threat from terrorism, demonstrations often cause inconvenience. Local demonstrations can begin spontaneously and escalate with little warning, disrupting transportation systems and city services and posing risks to travelers' personal safety. In response to such events, Indian authorities occasionally impose curfews and/or restrict travel. U.S. citizens are urged to avoid demonstrations and rallies as they have the potential for violence, especially immediately preceding and following elections and religious festivals (particularly when Hindu and Muslim festivals coincide). In addition, religious and inter-caste violence is unpredictable and occurs occasionally. In some cases, demonstrators specifically block roads near popular tourist sites in order to gain the attention of Indian authorities; occasionally vehicles transporting tourists are attacked in these incidents. U.S. citizens should monitor local television and print media and contact the U.S. Embassy or the nearest U.S. Consulate for further information about the current situation in areas where they wish to travel.

here is another example of what would happen to us should we dare voice our opinions while visiting and taking advantage of thier countries resources: jail or death....

We have witnessed the burning of churches in Iraq at the hands of jihadists. We also know that thousands of Christian Iraqis have fled because the Islamists imposed on them the traditional Shari’a choice for non-Muslims: Convert to Islam, pay a humiliating tax (jizzia), or be killed.

My advise is, if you don't like it here, please leave. I truly think you should leave, your welcome is offically wore out.

Only in america would someone feel like they have the PRIVELAGE to attack the very society they suck the fat from while visiting our country and taking ADVANTAGE of our education and wealth. Any other country VDL would be jailed, deported or killed.

Our liberalism extends its generous hand too far me thinks. And yes, I still pity her and all, but I truly think a bus ticket home for her would be right on time.

AND VDL, I really get sick to death of you indian women in dearbor nmichigan driving around (while your husbands work IT jobs at ford motor company) with your 14 kids popping around like popcorn not buckled into thier seat belts. Your sons are unruly and rude and all of your children should be buckled up, it is a law and it is for thier safety.

And, please tell the men to quit trying to get into the pants of every blond blue eyed woman they see, we know they all have wives and 14 kids in a one bedroom apartment somewhere, we don't want thier advances, it is uncomfortable, unnerving and unwanted. While you are at it, take that thing off your head while you are here. It makes us think you are a terrorist hiding a bomb under all that crap. Just a little advise to help you assimilate while you are our guest.

posted January 15, 2009 04:08 PM              

it is not conservatism, she is a radical politacally motivated extremest and she is on my dime in my country saying unthinkably disrespectful things about our society. I feel this is way out of line. Way out of line.

posted January 15, 2009 04:31 PM              

If I come into your country and behave in such an offensive manner attacking your culture, I fully EXPECT you to be intolerant of it.

posted January 15, 2009 08:06 PM            

quote:

---

you know eleanore, if i was to visit and attend higher learning in your country, i would follow your customs, respect your country your people and your customs. I would never be politically radical while visiting your country and rally against your way of life. never.
it is not conservatism, she is a radical politacally motivated extremest and she is on my dime in my country saying unthinkably disrespectful things about our society. I feel this is way out of line. Way out of line.

again i repeat, i would never ever in this lifetime ever behave in such a manner in your country, especailly if your country subsidised my education. I would be respectful and grateful for the opportunity. Extremests and radical extremests especially are considered by me to bear watching.

---

quote:

---

If I come into your country and behave in such an offensive manner attacking your culture, I fully EXPECT you to be intolerant of it.

just as I would not tolerate a dog crapping on my living room carpet.

---

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I'm a guest on foreign soil in Japan. And whenever I've had a question about their culture ... and sometimes a question that is apparantly offensive and a result of my ignorance ... the people I've been kind enough to come across never have taken an angry, condescending or judgemental attitude. They always ask, "Well, why do you think that?" And, given the chance to explain myself, they are GLAD to correct my mistaken understanding and do so with complete respect. Not because I'm an American, but because I'm a human being. And helping me see the truth without trying to shut me up because I'm just a stupid American serves us all better. And I try to be just as understanding about their misconceptions of America. Misconceptions which, by the way and through my experience with not just Japanese people but people from many different countries, are LEGION.

I disagree that people who come to America from other countries should shut up about any issues they have with our country. But then I'm a child of immigrants so I can understand how strange and confusing our country can be to others who come from such different circumstances. Not necessarily liberalism, but a lot of immigrant families I know do have criticism of certain things about America. And I think they have every freedom to express their concerns. They're not lesser beings because they weren't born American. At least not to me. My family has always been grateful to live in America and it's precisely this inner knowing that people like you expect such a form of gratitude that makes so many of us work our arses off to succeed. Because we don't want your pity or your backwards generosity and your charity with expectations. You might as well close our borders off to all immigrants ... or make them sign some kind of affidavit that, as some unworthy foreigner, they can only be grateful for what you are selfless enough to give them and that they never have the right to complain about anything here. It's just sickening. If that attitude were prevalent among Americans (and I have not found that to be the case, ime) then isolation would serve not only us better but the rest of the world, too.

I'm also going to assume that the reference to foreigners in America being similar to dogs in your living room was in no way meant to be dehumanising and insulting.

And, imo, our ideals of freedom of speech and whatever else, are not ours alone because we are American. They are the natural rights of all human beings and, imo, the goal is for all persons to have such freedoms recognized no matter where they are.

So, yeah, we're coming from vastly different perspectives on, not just liberalism versus conservatism or feminism or anything else on topic here, but on how we essentially view other humans. Have a good one.

*edited to add*

For reference, in case anyone thinks I'm taking Sunshine_lion's comments mistakenly, here are a couple of gems from other threads VDI posted about liberals/feminism.

quote:

---

I am sorry you live with oppression every day. They feed you that crap to keep you from wanting what we have. rights and freedom.

---

quote:

---

so basically a woman with no rights, who is married at 12-13yrs old, and can't even drive a car or visit her friends - thinks she has the right to say anything about our great country and the problems of our youth? Please do not come HERE and suck off the good of our land, do not buy our gas stations and get rich from our money.

You have some work to do in your own back yard before you even look at how high our grass is. We like our female children. We don't put up with abuseive husbands and & 70 percent of our rapes are unreported. You really don't know crap and would do best to go find a place to sit down and be quiet now.

---

I hope you can all understand that my concern is not with defending anything VDI has posted. I just don't think anyone deserves to be spoken to in such a personally insulting way, no matter what their beliefs are or where they come from. It's not generalized, it's about VDI.

Frankly, my parents come from Mexico and Cuba and I would be very insulted if someone decided to say similar things about me based on the assumption that what is true of some Mexicans or Cubans or their situations is automatically true of me as an individual... and that these things were essentially brought up for the purpose of insulting me as an individual based on my culture/ethnic background and to try to stifle my voice. Now, if anyone wants to talk about the real problems that exist in either Mexico or Cuba, please let's do. But let's not blanket all foreigners.

And isn't that ironic? VDI "done bad" by posting things that blanket one group of Americans in a genralized way based on some unfortunate situations. But assume that all Indians, including VDI personally, are living in similarly unfortunate situations as the ones above ... that's supposed to be a valid counter argument nevermind it's intent to personally insult VDI.

posted January 16, 2009 10:32 AM              

Eleanore - I think if you phrased your questions or concerns to them by calling thier home a shithole and thier women stipid, lesbo-ish fuckdolls, with ******** in tow, that take 500 dicks to make 3 kids, they would be offended. if you don't think so, try it and see. call it an experimaent and just note the results.

VDL said -filled with fat, lesbo-ish liberal women.32 year old , single mom with 3
b@stards from some 500 bad boys of the tri-state area
i have one thing for any sad looking single mom with b@stards in tow -

" Hey cheer up grl , at least the last d1ck was good "

Cruel me, women ar meant to have equal rights not equal responsibilites for the repercussions of their decisions - STUPID.

Because they are oppressed...never mind i have TWO college degrees down the line and am working on the third in San Jose..YUP right here in the liberal Sh1thole...

ok eleanore - so to you this is acceptable and I am the bad guy who should shut up and foot the bill? to what end I wonder...another attack of our people on our soil? whatever.

eleanore said: your backwards generosity and your charity with expectations
....charity with expectations....interesting - my thoughts - to whom much is given, much is expected.

you are confusing american immigrants who are citizens of our country with someone visiting our country on a visa, expressing anti american sentiment, who is here as our guest. Big difference. Take a look at the terrorist from 9-11 and see how many were citizens and how many were on visas current and expired.

If you were to start blogging about how stupid the women are in Japan for taking thier shoes off before entering a dining establishment, or whatever the customs are there, I am quite sure you wouldn't feel welcome there for long. You respect thier customs and therefore they respect and welcome you. Faux paux's do not include expressing seniment of disgust at the culture and if you bitterly ridicule thier culture, I would also question to you why are you there if you hate it so much. Is there a motive? If you indeed were having goverment subsidized education in that country, it would just be wrong and disrespectful to attack the hand that is pulling you up. While you see me as intolerant and whatever else you said, I know for a fact that if given the opportunity to study abroad, I would humbly respect the soil I stood on. It is the right thing to do.

so you can be look at me as the bad guy who is intolerant to you and whoever else thinks that..and you are right, I am intolerant of anti american political activists who are here on visas.

eleanore wrote - I'm also going to assume that the reference to foreigners in America being similar to dogs in your living room was in no way meant to be dehumanising and insulting.

you assume that and I will assume that VDL was not meaning to be dehumanizing and insulting with her choice of words in reference to liberal feminist hypocrites - you know words like stupid, fat, lesbo-ish, fuckdolls living in a shithole with all of thier ******* children.

so unbelievable that you find respect for humanity in her comments and do not see them as insulting and yet mine you pick apart. interesting thought process eleanore. kudo's to you for pointing out my intolerance.

at least I said it to her face which is more respect than she gives her co-workers with her comments that are on this posting. behind her back rediculing and name calling with derision. that was a personal attack without chance of retribution, her co-worker will never know how vdl really feels about her, will she? not unless she obtains a copy of what VDL wrote about her....but we all know what she thinks of her , don't we? pretty cowardly and easy to do. I am not hiding, I am not talking behind anyones back.

posted January 16, 2009 01:54 PM            

quote:

---

Feminism falied in Russia and brought down the empire - it is on its way to do the same for US.

---

Fall Of Russian Communism
After a long reign of 74 years (1917-1991), Communism collapsed in Russia. This could probably be attributed to a number of reasons:

The low standard of living among the Russians throughout the whole of the Communist era. This made the ideology unappealing and turned people off the idea of Communism as they thought Communism was ALL about living standards this poor.

The success of Capitalism in surrounding countries, which brought about a higher standard of living for Russia's neighbours. The people saw this and natrually grew envious and jealous of Capitalist countries. This brought about doubt among the people about the Communist ideology.

The constant fear the people lived in, being unable to have free expression, unlike in Capitalist countries where freedom of speech was a norm. The more outspoken people were punished severely and people felt they were being restrained.

The introduction of Gorbachev's reforms which brought about change for the lifestyle of the Russians, allowing them to have freedom of speech(glasnost). He also brought about reforms which not only did not help Russia's economic status, but sometimes worsened it(perestroika).

And of course, we must not forget the instincts of Man himself. Man by nature is an animal. He wants to have benefits out of his labour....

….. who knew it was because of irresponsible liberal feminists?? Gawd, the power liberal women have, to topple mighty countries!! Someone ought to put a stop to that, and keep all women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, or all the civilizations of the world are threatened!!

And ummmmm, venus, why should you pretend to care about feminism “bringing down the US empire”?? Wouldn’t you be rejoicing, along with many others in the world??

posted January 16, 2009 04:59 PM              

vdi said -
Femmie exhibit A - B1tchy Supervisor .

On being told i am soon to be married to a boy my parents are hunting for...

"" Awww sweetty you are too young, you need to concentrate on your careerr honey, tell your fiance to wait ,i would rather dump him, if he wasnt willing to wait for me , ..a girl needs to play the field ""

Righto, so basically i am weak because i am marrying in the peak of my physical beauty and fertlity rather than being a free fcukdoll for every bad boy in every bar in Silicon Valley.

funny - i saw a supervisor expressing concern over a fellow employees lack of choices in life. expressing concern, lets assume her concern is genuine

vdi - called her a free fuckdoll for every bad boy in silicon valley, lets assume she meant it.

and eleanore saw -
a generalized negative statement about a group

I guess everybody really see's things differently. I see someone who throws a rock and hides thier hand. who takes a check in one hand and holds a sword in the other.

posted January 19, 2009 08:57 AM            

quote:

---

Eleanore - I think if you phrased your questions or concerns to them by calling thier home a shithole and thier women stipid, lesbo-ish fuckdolls, with ******** in tow, that take 500 dicks to make 3 kids, they would be offended. if you don't think so, try it and see. call it an experimaent and just note the results.

---

Um, do you really think that all people are polite and courteous? I've heard quite a few people make comments that I can completely understand would be offensive about some of their customs here ... and they would still rather address the misconception than get in a fruitless argument. Comments relating to, for example, the Yakuza, the seeming acceptance of older married males seeking "companionship" outside of marriage, the clothes their daughters wear to school, the "backwards" attitude about how women and men should relate .... I assure you, there are a great many things that a lot of us Americans over here find very confusing. And some people, particularly with a little liquor in them, can be quite offensive whether or not they mean it. In fact, now that I really think about it, they're more likely to be told off by a fellow American while a Japanese person stands back amused or tries to intervene with a "Wait a minute, let's try to talk about this ..."

As to the next part of that post ... I don't really understand which part is you talking and which part is you quoting or referring to what VDI wrote. So I will say this, and in bold and capital letters, as clearly as I can ... I DON'T AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT VDI POSTED AND I'VE WRITTEN THAT VARIOUS TIMES HERE ... SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO TRY TO "PROVE" HOW INCORRECT MANY OF THE "FACTS" THAT SHE POSTED ARE TO ME ... I AM ALREADY AWARE, THANK YOU."

VDI thinks some people she knows or some women in general are oppressed. THAT IS HER OPINION. Just because you don't like it or disagree with her doesn't mean she has to shut up to please you. Yes, I think it's acceptable for people to complain about other people. Like when people complain about liberals or conservatives or Christians or Muslims or poor people or rich people. Or anyone else.

quote:

---

eleanore said: your backwards generosity and your charity with expectations
....charity with expectations....interesting - my thoughts - to whom much is given, much is expected.

you are confusing american immigrants who are citizens of our country with someone visiting our country on a visa, expressing anti american sentiment, who is here as our guest. Big difference. Take a look at the terrorist from 9-11 and see how many were citizens and how many were on visas current and expired.

---

And what did any of us do to "deserve" being born in America, the land of so much wealth and opportunity? I guess those people in Darfur starving to death now must karmically deserve their suffering ... maybe they were all Nazis in a past life. IMO, the Much is given freely to all persons born in the US just for being born here and it is of them that much is Expected. Otherwise, there are a hell of a lot of people in third world countries who owe us quite a lot for the medicine, food and other supplies we regularly ship them. Maybe indentured servitude would be the answer for you, since these people sometimes have nothing to begin with and nothing to give back for your "selfless generosity". (Yes, of course that's sarcasm.)

Just very conflicting views on humanity we have and that's fine. When I give money to someone who is needy, I don't expect anything in return. Do I wish them the very best and hope they succeed? Yes. Do they owe me anything? Not at all. Do I think people who have the benefits of our society are responsible for their own successes and failures? Yes. But we have much more than so many others who are unfortunate enough to live around the world have. I don't think they deserve to be belittled for the conditions they were born into or that there is anything remotely amusing about it.

Obviously, you've never spent a great deal of time in immigrant communities. So your ignorance on "not biting the hand that feeds you" is understandable. And I don't mean ignorance as an attack, I mean a literal lack of knowledge. FYI, there are a great many immigrants who are embittered with America. They don't all speak the language which makes it difficult to get ahead early on. They are mostly economic or political refugees so they were literally fleeing to save their lives. They end up living in the poorest of neighborhoods, at least for a while but many for their whole lives, and really have a burning anger for all the miserly "help" they've received. Many refuse aid out of pride no matter how badly they need it because they know it isn't done willingly but because their destitute conditions are an eyesore. Really, not all immigrants are on their hands and knees thanking the US for anything. There are many who wish they could return home, where they feel they belong, and wonder why it is that the concerns of their country don't matter to Americans unless it's to keep those damn immigrants from getting in here illegaly. We can liberate the Middle East but we ignore those who live south of us in their very real plights. In fact, the only people I've ever met who are willing to help the poor without judgement and without expectations are Churches and Non-profits.

quote:

---

so unbelievable that you find respect for humanity in her comments and do not see them as insulting and yet mine you pick apart. interesting thought process eleanore. kudo's to you for pointing out my intolerance.

---

Quote me where I wrote that I "found humanity in VDI's comments". Please. I'm also going to assume from your lack of understanding of what I wrote that the vast difference between a choice in political ideology and a born-into racial or cultural difference is completely lost on you. "Liberals are idiots" is somehow the same as saying "Indians are less than human". Um, no.

quote:

---

at least I said it to her face which is more respect than she gives her co-workers with her comments that are on this posting. behind her back rediculing and name calling with derision. that was a personal attack without chance of retribution, her co-worker will never know how vdl really feels about her, will she? not unless she obtains a copy of what VDL wrote about her....but we all know what she thinks of her , don't we? pretty cowardly and easy to do. I am not hiding, I am not talking behind anyones back.

---

Is this a joke? Because nobody here ever talks about their personal life or discusses their real life problems here, right? All the people who ask for relationship advice or who complain about their work or family situations are hypocrites, right? Maybe to you, not to me. People here post things about their personal lives all the time ... and often times, negative opinions about the people in their RL are shared. I believe that people have every right to vent or complain here about that. The same way they complain or vent about other non-members such as celebrities or politicians.

posted January 19, 2009 09:34 AM            

quote:

---

eleanore said : And isn't that ironic? VDI "done bad" by posting things that blanket one group of Americans in a genralized way
vdi said -
Femmie exhibit A - B1tchy Supervisor .

On being told i am soon to be married to a boy my parents are hunting for...

"" Awww sweetty you are too young, you need to concentrate on your careerr honey, tell your fiance to wait ,i would rather dump him, if he wasnt willing to wait for me , ..a girl needs to play the field ""

Righto, so basically i am weak because i am marrying in the peak of my physical beauty and fertlity rather than being a free fcukdoll for every bad boy in every bar in Silicon Valley.

funny - i saw a supervisor expressing concern over a fellow employees lack of choices in life. expressing concern, lets assume her concern is genuine

vdi - called her a free fuckdoll for every bad boy in silicon valley, lets assume she meant it.

and eleanore saw -
a generalized negative statement about a group

I guess everybody really see's things differently. I see someone who throws a rock and hides thier hand. who takes a check in one hand and holds a sword in the other.

---

In black and white.

VDI thinks that LIBERAL FEMINISTS are hypocrites. Her thread is about her NEGATIVE OPINIONS and THEORIES on that particular GROUP, ie, LIBERAL FEMINISTS.

With me so far?

Okay, along with the ARTICLES that VDI has posted to support her opinions and/or theories (which no one has to agree with, of course) she has also provided ANECDOTES from her PERSONAL LIFE to support her OPINIONS.

Again, VDI complaining about her co-workers is not against LL policies. If you want to complain about your brother being a mysoginstic jerk or your boss being a gold-digging **** , you can actually do that. And people do post things like that, in different parts of this site. Is it nice, not really. Is it against any policy? No.

Now, is her use of profane language out of line? It certainly isn't appreciated and it would behoove her to tone it down. This is, however, GU and more slack is given for that kind of thing. I personally wish that people would keep that to a minimum.

So no matter which way you want to swing it, sunshine_lion, the fact is that VDI did not insult YOU here PERSONALLY. She has as much right as anyone else to share or complain about people in her personal life and that does not constitute a personal attack on a member. It's the member part that is throwing you off. And if you refuse to see that difference, between a member here and a non-member, you've got quite a few people to complain to about their posting habits.

You, however, did make personally insulting remarks against VDI, which I have already quoted.

So, for the record.

1) I do not agree with the majority of the articles posted regarding this topic.

2) I think most of the information here is taken from isolated circumstances and exaggerated or put out of context to reflect poorly on an entire group when it perhaps represents a small portion of that group.

3) I wish everyone would stop using profane language.

4) I am NOT supporting any of the negative opinions VDI has shared.

5) I do not agree, as per the policies of this site, with employing the use of a personal attack on a member just because you disagree with their ideology or because you find their opinions about anything including other non-members offensive.

6) I do not agree, also per the policies of this site that have come to light due to similar past circumstances, that attacks based on race/culture/nationality are in any way the same as attacks on religious orientation or political ideology. For those who can't grasp the difference, it is choice. You cannot choose (barring religious beliefs that cannot be upheld as definitive proof) to be born black or white or Nigerian or English. But you do choose to believe whatever it is you believe in.

posted January 19, 2009 10:31 AM              

Anyone that posts grievances pointing to an individaual to either make a point or to just vent has to be aware that this is indeed a public forum and the party / person they are complaining about may end up finding out what they really think, whether it be a cheating spouse snooping and finding thier proof, or a supervisor who stumbles across writings that are unflattering made by an employee. anonmity is really quite relative. I think anyone posting on these types of forums needs to remember that what they say here could indeed be brought to the light of day, to assume otherwise isn't very smart. So we all need to be prepared to admit publically in real life the very personal things we write about.

Hypocrisy (or the state of being a hypocrite) is the act of preaching a certain belief, religion or way of life, but not, in fact, holding these same virtues oneself. For example, if a person were to tell one to repent for his sins yet he never repents himself this is hypocrisy.

In other languages, including French, a hypocrite is one who hides his intentions and true personality. This definition is different from that of the English language

I don't have to like VDL or what she stands for or believes. It does not mean I think everyone from her country feels the same as she does, nor do I believe all parties living in the states on visas hold her values and or opinions. so there it is, I personally do not like her or what she stands for. I can sleep at night knowing that. I can sleep at night knowing that if someone from my persoanal life read my posts here, while somewhere inside feeling like my privacy was somewhat violated, I knew indeed all along it could happen.

people like me, you said, made your family feel like they had to work hard to prove themselves, and so on. I would never expect anyone to make sacrifices that I am not also willing to make myself for my family and our security. whether at times I had to work 3 jobs and fall into bed exhausted at night, I did that for many years. You have no idea how much of my income is bestowed upon those less fortunate than myself, nor how many charities I support becasue I know it is the right thing to do. I have known wealth and I have known poverty persoanlly.

yes I agree, I should have not taken her words as personal insults, and yet somewhere inside of me, I did. I wouldn't be in the position I am in today had I not learned to work hard, fight and stand up for what I believe is right. You are more than right that I am very fortunate to be born into this country and have the freedoms that I do to express myself and make my life something more than what it was, to put aside victim mentality, take responsibility, do what needs to be done to feed the children, work, cook. clean, pay the bills, fall into bed exhausted, and get up and do it all again until things are what I have made them. I am blessed and fortunate and I realize it more than you know.

I am a liberal feminist
I am not a hypocrite

posted January 29, 2009 11:20 AM              

The fact is it IS the english language Oxford dictionary term for a child born out of wedlock and is used in forner colonies of the Queen - just like it was used in literature and in practical life .

b@stard is NOT a SLUR.

It is only the dictionary term .

Unfortunately , thax to liberal political correction or rather pussification of cultural communication campaign it has become politically incorrect to use.

As if children with stable parental figures and b@stards are EQUAL.

If anything the above material proves just how very , very INEQUAL the differences are and the logic i have been given by the whining hearts of our Lady Liberty - just as they are given by any liberal douchebag is...

" We know b@stards are not EQUAL to regular children but lets not rub it in "

Same goes for the term " single mother " -

an attempt to make who were formerly termed wh0res or mistresses look like they are EQUALS on par with mothers and wives .

even when they are single handedly siring all that makes the cream of Lowest denominator - the ones we sustain with hardearned tax money.

that is our reward for being responsible.

Because Liberal Socialist pussies think we are EQUAL to those whose lives are a MESS of gargantaum proportions.

And NO , these single whatsits are NOT mothers let alone be EQUAL to mothers.

A mother is that being who loves her children in her heart before they are evn conceived - so much so she makes sure she has all that he/she needs once on their way is in place - a loving union between the parents, a secure home ,educationa nd future.

i am NOT going to insult my Mother or any mother by implying that they are EQUAL TO -

A pathologically dumb,narcissitic excuse of womanhood who thinks and acts from her Vagina - and creates her family out of the inability of keeping her knees together - and decides to keep the baby when she doesnt know which one of the many junkies,players abd badboys is the father - one who is so narcissistic she has a baby when she is no position able to give him a life worth living unless a hard - working tax payers most of whom are male pay for it - and all this to fill the hole inside her heart where a loving parental relationship would have been.

To hell with EQUALITY - i am going to make sure i make myself ineligible for taxation - i will donate my hard earned cash to a women education programmes rather than sponsor a third of the nations choicest worst of human genetics....i mean b@stards.

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/

quote:

---

How To Diagnose If A Community Is Declining

point no . 4

Determine if the general use of language is losing discipline, for this can only mean the general use of thought is also losing discipline, which is a decay of understanding. Such a result is indicated by the disappearance of plain speaking from citizens' sentiments. An undeniable symptom of the malaise is the deliberate use of more words than necessary, such as invoking "at this moment in time" instead of "now", or "the state of the art" instead of "latest". And the addition of surplus words such as converting a "riot" into a "riot situation" and "opportunity" into "a window of opportunity". As well as the blurring of meaning caused by the popular adoption of vague words like "situation, position" and now (circa 2003) "focus". The less precise our language the less precise our thoughts, and the less precise our thoughts the more vague our language; which is a self-sustaining cycle of increasing weakness of understanding

---