HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » TahitiNut » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Body in Michigan - Heart in California
Home country: Born in USA ... Reborn in Tahiti
Current location: Right here, under my hat
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 71,611

About Me

Matrimonially experienced man, leading edge baby boomer, seeking long term relationship with warm sunshine, seawater, soft breezes, coral reefs, palm trees, and the meaning of life, the universe, and everything. http://www.tahitinut.com/

Journal Archives

The LDS doctrine of "free agency" ...

.. separates the rightness of a choice from the freedom to make a choice. In this respect, I wholeheartedly agree with the LDS stance. As a liberal, I am steadfastly opposed to any restriction (e.g. "prior restraint" on an individual's freedom to either (a) sin or (b) commit a felony. Thus, any adherent of a religion who, for alleged religious reasons, advocates legal restrictions on such choices is one of the worst kinds of human beings: a hypocrite. Further, if such an individual proclaims themselves an advocate for "freedom" and/or "liberty," they are then doubly a hypocrite. Even further, if such an individual proclaims themselves an advocate for "smaller government," then thay are triply a hypocrite.

Thus, Rmoney is not only a hypocrite of the third order, he is an unmitigated whore, virtually free of any character of note and essentially absent any integrity whatsoever..

"America! Love it or leave it!"

Mitt should follow his money and GET THE FUCK OUT!!

The self-indulged son-of-a-bitch won the sperm lottery and was born in a country that made his father rich, and then made the Mitt-Wit even richer ... and the motherfucker thinks WE OWE HIM SOMETHING??? Well, he can kiss my rosy, red asshole and leave. Let some hard-working Mexican families take his place. We'd be far better off.

The BIGGEST lie: "He kept us safe."

It's mind-boggling how the GOPhers, using every propaganda trick in the book, flew in the face of having the worst attack on American soil in the entire history of the nation and, rather than accepting responsibility for being completely asleep at the switch, proclaimed themselves "defenders" of the people and best-suited to "Keeping America Safe."

"It wasn't our fault"??? Bullshit. The BIGGER/BIGGEST lie is that they "kept us safe." And much of the public bought it.

Aided by Faux News and EVERY media outlet in the country, this BIG LIE flies in the face of absolutely every fact of the past 30 (and more) years.

It's beyond gross hypocrisy to whine about Obama's "divisive" killing of bin Laden. There isn't a word in the English language to describe how totally insane their "logic" is.

I'd even suggest ...

"many, if not most, men work out of necessity even though they would choose to stay home with their children if they could." I sure know the *I* would. The pressures of social/cultural expectations, economic necessity, and even spousal mores create even less of a choice for men than women. The fact that many men "buy into" the expectation that their very identity is tied to "what they do" does not, in my view, contraindicate this fact. We still live in a culture where young boys are asked "what will you BE when you grow up?" and young girls are Disneyfied by "some day your Prince will come." Some might argue it's the "ontogeny of phylogeny" ... the sum of evolutionary 'natural selection' where the male's (perceived?) ability to bring home the kill, fight the invaders, and plant his semen was what attracted the most fertile females. That, of course, can be easily turned into "be careful what you ask for you may get it, ladies."

The eternal conundrum persists: Just WHAT attracts the opposite sex ... and how does that influence 'choices'??? I submit that the influence of the 'attraction' question STILL far outweighs the sophomoric 'discussions' about 'choice.'

Gonads RULE!

As a Deist myself ...

... I reject the time-bound notion of a past-future "let it run" paradigm. Time itself is part of "Creation" ... and I believe in a 'Creator' who created the "beginning" and "end" simultaneously. Further, I subscribe to the "multiverse" theory, so it's a bit like a vast 'fabric' of 'reality' instead of some linear model. Lastly, such a view precludes the very notion of 'prayer' like a 'Letter to Santa God.' For me, 'prayer' is meditative ... and is an expression of belonging and faith that all is as it 'should' be and my passion and participation is me BEING me.

These are concepts and a personal faith that I rarely discuss, due to the absence of an adequate vocabulary (hence my use of quotes for the more unsatisfactory terms) and regard each person's 'path' as their own. It's not (for me) a competition. There's no small degree of Taoism in my philosophy ... having (for me) a somewhat 'better' vocabulary for my thoughts.

Then again, I eschew dogma so all of the above could change at any time.

The time is long past ripe to have a major upgrade to the FLSA.

The abuses of "exempt" job classifications, the imposition of personal intrusions unrelated to the job, the abuses of the visa system, the appalling plague of 'wrongful discharges' for opposing illicit business behavior, the hostile treatment of GLBT in the workplace, the widespread abuse of 'casual overtime,' the oppressive mandates of availability during non-working hours, and the anti-union sociopathy that pervades virtually every company.

The average S&P500 employee receives total "compensation" of less that 30% of the value of his or her labors, and others receive even less than that. It's plantation economics run amok.

It doesn't take much intellect to discern the difference between fact-based commentary

... and totally baseless propaganda. We have a disturbing habit of making superficial false-equivalencies and engaging in "they did it too" protestations ... something that was old and hollow even when I was an 8-year-old.

I'm inclined to vote for the person most likely to listen to valid criticism from the "left" ...

... and possibly act in a positive manner in response. What seems totally antithetical to that criterion is to withhold that criticism. Thus, the social 'gag rule' makes no sense to me whatsoever.

The "American Dream" I was taught ....

... was (1) self-governance in a nation where all are equal under the law and (2) having the opportunity to enjoy the fruits (sweet or sour) of one's own labor, without ceding the lion's share to some lord or owner.

It's the "kings" that want you to believe that everyone wants to be a "king." The "politics of envy." It's bullshit.

My maternal grandparents immigrated to the United States in the early 20th century, when the vast majority of the world was still governed by monarchies. The monarchies are going, but the sense of entitled privilege of a 'ruling class' is still embedded in the right wing. Blame Disney. And "business" schools.

Examples are legion, but I'll offer just one. The NBA players went on strike for 53% of the net income resulting from their labors. The "owners" objected. The players effectively won. Millionaires (the 1%) in organized labor. Yet the average worker in an S&P500 corporation gets less than 30% of the value of their labor. Too bad. If they were millionaires, they'd do better, I guess.

In "the mind of the beholder" ...

Interestingly, I don't regard former girlfriends in a negative light for engaging in the referenced activity any more than I regard anyone acting lovingly toward any individual so equipped, no matter their sexual orientation.

When used in the pejorative sense, however, it has more to do with prostitution ... "servicing" some male at the source of his 'identity' in order to gain some benefit or avoid some penalty. Thus, the basis of the sense in which it's pejorative has little if anything to do with sexual orientation (like rape has little if anything to do with sex -or- love) but has everything to do with gender - i.e. the mere fact that one has a penis is, in some sense, a negative.

The "standards" implicit in judging such rhetoric Yea or Nay seem highly subjective, and more indicative of the bias of the judge than the alleged intention of the miscreant. Thus, when the miscreant is male the judge clings to the inference of homophobia, which immediately indicts the miscreant at the felonious level. On the other hand, when the miscreant is female and the most prevalent inference may be gender-based, the jury is either (well) hung or brings in a verdict of not guilty, of nothnig more than a misdemeanor.

It's exceedingly strange that this dynamic persists ... but it does.

So ... I raise a banner in celebration of the cocksuckers I've known. Bless them and long may they thrive.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »