Posted by lil' jimi on April 23, 2003, at 12:17:52
In reply to Re: Lose with War » lil' jimi, posted by wendy b. on April 23, 2003, at 6:25:04
hi wendy!
thanks for your post!> > above here somewhere, i posted:
> > > Opinions?
>
> hey, jimi, another person in favor of the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' here...
glad to have you! ....
and as much as i admire the idealism embodied in the vision of a classless proletarian utopia, i'll want to abjure the implications of the 'dictatorship', what with being for free speech and all,
and if only to avoid possibly being over-intrepreted/misconstrued by our fellow posters .....
but i know what you mean and i appreciate the comradery... and your friendly spirit ....> i appreciated your post, and think Robbins and Sarandon are brave to do what they do...
evidently Sarandon said on the tv show "The View" that she was disappointed in Hillary for voting for war... since Hillary is MY senator, i also think: well, what the hell is she on about? i voted for her as a person who had a reasonably liberal stance on issues important to me... now what? who else is there going to be to vote for next time? the green party candidate who has no chance of winning? and then feel like i'm just flushing my vote down the proverbial toilet?
>
you have touched on one of the sensitive points, for me anyway, among our Loyal Oppostion and you have expressed my dismay most eloquently, absent the natural total-screaming-outrage reaction i'm inclined to ... sadly, senator clinton's husband is no help in this regard either, but she is Your senator .... so perhaps you should let her know how you feel .... my senators do not care how i feel, but i tell them anyway .... i'd be telling senator clinton a lot more , because i'd expect a lot more, if she was representing me ... where does schumer stand?..... unfortunately, this hillary-syndrome has afflicted a lot of the Loyal Opposition..: questionable loyalty and not enough opposition.and thanks also for phrasing exactly my sentiments about the right's stalking-horse, who call themselves 'greens' ...
>
> > ((caution to all of our "too-sensitive-for-political-type-stuff-which-they-can't-agree-with" Babblers: PLEASE, please, PLuH-LEEZ,
> > DO NOT READ THIS!!!))
>
> good boy, jimi.
>
don't think i overdid that? ... 'ppreciate the head pat!>
> > (heh, heh .... like that's going to do any good!)
>
> "well, at least he remains realistic, not totally devoid of a connection to reality..." said his shrink.
>
heh, well, i try. Thanks for the compliment ... my Lexapro should get some credit ... maybe>
> > ah, that's better ... .. now that we're down to the-strong-of-neurotransmitter and reasonably adult-of-maturity, and it's just us folks here ..... can we ... message ?
>
> i will send you some really great web sites about freedom of speech (since this is what i think we're talking about here, right?)Please do! and thank you! .... and yes, freedom of speech! .... which implies anyone may talk about anything, here or elsewhere .... BB guns, faithless husbands, pigeons, included ....no harm done .... it's all good.
> i have to go to work, fight off the creditors (bow to shar here), and cart daughter to various activities after school, but i will check in later...
>
blessings upon you and all the working moms .... they have got each of us trapped on these personal-finance treadmills .... hang in there .... our one and only is just 4.> thanks for sticking to your guns... (no, wait! bad turn of phrase)...
>
> wendymy thanks to you (and i can let 'em misconstrue that one .... maybe?)
peace,
~ jim
poster:lil' jimi
thread:220134
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20030421/msgs/221755.html