Interesting USA Today Story

[FOTD]

I'm not judgemental about your monikers and avitars. So, why do that with what could be manipulated internet images?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

I'm not judgemental about your monikers and avitars. So, why do that with what could be manipulated internet images?

No one has come forward to dispute the images so far.  

The Che flag brings out as much sentiment in me as the Confederate flag or German Nazi flag- which is zero. [B)]

[dbacks fan]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

I'm not judgemental about your monikers and avitars. So, why do that with what could be manipulated internet images?

The picture is a screen shot from a video from the Houston Fox affiliate.

You can veiw the video on Glenn Becks website. Click on the link: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/clips/featured.php

and look for the link that says "Notice the flag on the wall.....

[FOTD]

Glenn Beck would cause my computer to explode.

Right wingnut smear cam pain.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

I'm not judgemental about your monikers and avitars. So, why do that with what could be manipulated internet images?

No one is disputing these images.  Apparently the Florida campaign offices displayed Che images as well.  

As we can see from some of the other Obama supporter posts in this thread, Che is a revered cultural figure among them, and a revered "symbol of political rebirth".  He has a "historical legacy"  bla bla bla.

Face it! If Carlos Santana hadn't worn the Che shirt at the 2005 Academy Awards, most of the young mush heads wouldn't' even know who he is.  I'm glad his "rich historical legacy" has been resurrected.  It's another opportunity for people to learn, and that's what's important.

We run the risk of repeating so much of history's dark days unless people really learn about them.

Get to know Che.  He's a hero on most leftist blogs, so start there.  Then read the actual history of his actions, written by his generals and the people around him.

He was a revolutionary, and an agent for change, I will admit that, but that does not make him a great man, not even a good man.  History is dappled with the blood spilt by such men.

[waterboy]

Gawd, Gaspar. You are so full of yourself and a bag of turds on the side. Were you ever young? Or did you just materialize fully condescending and self righteous?

Did you know that Time put Hitler on its cover as "man of the year" back in the thirties? Didn't mean they were fascist and revered his policies. Meant he instituted change within his country which had been ravaged by war reparations and inflation. Lindbergh was impressed and so was Churchill. Were they fascist too? And for butchery how about Idi Amin? You think Che was a butcher? Read up some more dude. We made a movie about that prick.

Like it or not, accurate history or not, Che's figure has become a generic icon for struggle, revolution and change. Like "have a coke", or "cancer sucks". A coke could be any soft drink and cancer doesn't perform bj's but each has become acceptable and understood.

Chalk it up to naive, enthusiastic youth who live by icons. Just like the youth of the fifties who didn't know Elvis was a druggie or that Mongomery Clift was gay.

Memo to workers from the big O: trash those damn Che flags asap and focus on real change.

[dbacks fan]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Gawd, Gaspar. You are so full of yourself and a bag of turds on the side. Were you ever young? Or did you just materialize fully condescending and self righteous?

Did you know that Time put Hitler on its cover as "man of the year" back in the thirties? Didn't mean they were fascist and revered his policies. Meant he instituted change within his country which had been ravaged by war reparations and inflation. Lindbergh was impressed and so was Churchill. Were they fascist too? And for butchery how about Idi Amin? You think Che was a butcher? Read up some more dude. We made a movie about that prick.

Like it or not, accurate history or not, Che's figure has become a generic icon for struggle, revolution and change. Like "have a coke", or "cancer sucks". A coke could be any soft drink and cancer doesn't perform bj's but each has become acceptable and understood.

Chalk it up to naive, enthusiastic youth who live by icons. Just like the youth of the fifties who didn't know Elvis was a druggie or that Mongomery Clift was gay.

Memo to workers from the big O: trash those damn Che flags asap and focus on real change.

+1

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy



Like it or not, accurate history or not, Che's figure has become a generic icon for struggle, revolution and change. Like "have a coke", or "cancer sucks". A coke could be any soft drink and cancer doesn't perform bj's but each has become acceptable and understood.

I didn't mean to offend.  I had no idea that Che meant so much to you guys.

Still am still young as far as I'm concerned.  I just never traveled in any circles that EVER idolized Che.

I will speak no more of it.

I do agree that Obama needs to focus on real symbols of change.  I think he is still being defined by his followers, and many of his followers don't really understand the definition they are trying to portray.

[waterboy]

I never idolized him either though I thought the image on smoking papers was cool. BTW if you're over 27, you are no longer young!

Now your last remark is interesting. What do you base it on though? I have seen nothing that indicated he has been forming policy or creating stands based on those young supporters. They may think that. What I see is a yearning for a change in the way we do things, see things, plan things. A yearning for thoughtful consideration of issues rather than a lockstep narrow view most likely promoted by special interests. Cuba is a good example.

Someone around here threw out the assertion that China was going to drill for oil offshore of Cuba and that we would be in the humbling situation of having to buy oil from them because we won't drill offshore. Guess what? It isn't true. Did anyone rush to post a thread retracting these posts? No. Did Glen Beck rush to enlighten his hordes? No.  This is electioneering and governance by innuendo, half truth and hearsay. We need to move away from such nonsense.

[tim huntzinger]

The issue is that by the time this cycle is over McCain will be portrayed as sucking the marrow from starving babies and Obama will be portrayed leading the charge crucifying anyone with money while he drinks their blood.

Anything that can be used to emphasize those typifications will be passed around the nets and make their way into the echo chambers.  Especially when the offensive item is in an official HQ.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I never idolized him either though I thought the image on smoking papers was cool. BTW if you're over 27, you are no longer young!

Now your last remark is interesting. What do you base it on though? I have seen nothing that indicated he has been forming policy or creating stands based on those young supporters. They may think that. What I see is a yearning for a change in the way we do things, see things, plan things. A yearning for thoughtful consideration of issues rather than a lockstep narrow view most likely promoted by special interests. Cuba is a good example.

Someone around here threw out the assertion that China was going to drill for oil offshore of Cuba and that we would be in the humbling situation of having to buy oil from them because we won't drill offshore. Guess what? It isn't true. Did anyone rush to post a thread retracting these posts? No. Did Glen Beck rush to enlighten his hordes? No.  This is electioneering and governance by innuendo, half truth and hearsay. We need to move away from such nonsense.

Damn!  I guess I'm old then.  As for China, it was originally reported on CNN.  http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/economy/oil_cuba/index.htm

The details of the drilling contracts by both India and China were also covered this morning (caught it on my drive to work) on The WSJ news network on XM.  I also just heard them talk of it this morning at work on KRMG.

So if it's a hoax, it's a really good one!

You can also download the maps from CNN.

[cannon_fodder]

1) Cuba is already doing low-level drilling closer to Florida than we are.

2) The story is partially true, but over stated.  There is an agreement to drill between China and Cuba.  BUT, it has been postponed until 2009.

A brief Google News search will shed light on it for you.  It wasn't a "hoax,"  just people with incomplete information on both sides.

[rwarn17588]

Thing is, nobody's going to care in November about a handful of Obama supporters flying Che flags, especially when 80 percent of Americans think the country's on the wrong track.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Thing is, nobody's going to care in November about a handful of Obama supporters flying Che flags, especially when 80 percent of Americans think the country's on the wrong track.

He shoots.......HE SCORES!

[waterboy]

It was being reported on MSNBC last night that the story was not true. If they are drilling closer to Florida than we are then its in international waters. We should be scared because of China's history of catastrophic public works failures, not whether they will beat us in the race towards peak oil. Given the whole story it appears it has some truth but is being tossed around the net like it proves we need to drill in these protected areas.

A reminder folks. Supply is not the problem in this oil crisis. It will be a problem in the long term but then everything is. Domestic energy consumption, global demand, sinking dollar value and the failure to invest in alternative energy are more important than offshore drilling to our future.

These stories and McCain's sudden flip on longstanding support of protecting these areas is tied to Bush's opportunistic ploy to get drilling exemptions for his pals before he exits. They feel they can get dual use by blaming limited supply as the reason for the higher gasl. prices and use it against the Dems to get traction. Corn and its derivatives is next on the list.

It is exactly what I pointed out is wrong with the Bush style of governance and electioneering. Win at all costs, innundate the public with half truths and fall in line behind the "decisionmaker". McCain is more of the same.