Maobama

Dateline: Wed 01 Dec 2010

Friends who recently returned from China noted that the most popular T shirt in that amazing country is Maobama. Google it; you will see images of our fearless leader translated into Mao, their late, fearless leader. My favorite is the red version. But of course.

Here's the paradox: in China, that shirt means the wearer thinks Obama is way cool.

Here, that shirt is an anti-Obama statement. Hence my friends refused to purchase one...

An afterthought, from my innocents abroad -- the Chinese do NOT have national health insurance. If they want insurance, they must buy it.

I'm sure it is cheap.

Like everything from China, where mass production rules....and capitalism is strangely vibrant.

Comments

hendy [Member] said:

As regards the afterthought, there's no free insurance here, either. There are some coverage plans under Medicare/Medicaid, but while my autistic brother doesn't have to pay, I certainly do... and most other able-bodied people not on the public dole.

Would a MaObama shirt be an insult here? Mao killed about six million with his failed plans, and some say more. He set the tone for Chinese politik for decades. Today, China has huge over population concerns, pollution unrivaled (outside of Lake County Indiana), and lots of governmental difficulties ranging from justice to financing.

Obama is no socialist, much to the surprise of the right-wing. Socialism doesn't mean public health and safety financing, indeed it's an entire ecosystem that's impossible to implement here.

So the shirt isn't an insult, just a cultural paradox.

2010-12-02 13:52:06

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Yeah, but the wingnuts love to throw around words like "socialist" because it's supposed to trigger an internal wretching.

And one month ago, the country wretched.

Their folly is already being exposed. Gridlock is the likely result. Sometimes, that's not all bad.

Case in point: only in the minds of those wingnuts, is the expiration of 2002 tax cuts, called a "tax increase."

Common sense weeps. Somehow, we'll survive. The Republic is pretty resilient. We survive bad presidents and t-shirt mantras.

2010-12-03 06:12:18

hendy [Member] said:

Have you noticed that long debugged/de-myth'd rubrics seem to be popping up again and again? It's like nothing ever gets settled in the country. The anti-union smoke and mirrors gets larger, the "don't tax the uber-rich 'cause they're our massas and give us our jobs" BS and a whole line of madness seems to crop up like the old 'whak-a-mole' machine? It's disheartening.

There is no common sense any more, just a lot of personal prejudices and opinions masquerading as 'facts'. Makes me want to shut off the news altogether.

2010-12-03 10:27:35

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

God Hendy we're beginning to sound like old folks.

I'm still actively engaged in the political process. But I admit, it causes heartburn most days. Solid polciy discussions are kaput.

They are kaput in part, because on Nov. 6, 20098, the GOP chose a policy of "no" for the coming two years.

It was a huge risk for them. It could just as easily have failed. But it didn't. They held the line hard. They used the Senate's 60-vote cloture club, as a deadly weapon. It worked.

So there's the fulcrum of what passes for public policy thee days: get to 40%, hold your line, and wait for the next presidential election.

I would've gone kicking and screaming, but Obama decided otherwise. Probably to his detriment.

And now, they have the nerve to tell us, that restoring pre-2002 tax cuts to the top 1.8% of us, is a huge tax increase that will cripple the job-creation picture. Because God knows the last eight years has been so good at creating jobs.

Tickle down, or trickle on, we can't seem to carry on a civil discussion about tax policy. It doesn't bode well. Especially when all of us are represented by 435 members of Congress, and the special interests are awash in money, eager to buy off members of the House and Senate, aided by the Citizens United nonsense. Dissect the anti-Obama crowd, and you find a lot of subtle, uh--crap.

Lobby Money talks and bullshit walks.



2010-12-03 15:27:43

hendy [Member] said:

My sentiments exactly. But worse, it's bribery and a horrid example. And it confirms that most of what the nuns taught me about civics as an elementary school kid, was both wrong and dangerous. It doesn't work that way. It's payola. The 'Touch'.

Where are the Dirksens, the Bobby Kennedys, even the Goldwaters, the real statesmen (and women?). Where's Tip O'Neil? Gone, gone away.

2010-12-03 20:29:59

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

It's always fear of the next election, that drives the actions. And not fear in a good way.

Just watch the next session of the House. There will be multiple meaningless votes, set up to trap the opposition party, not to advance any legislative agenda.
It's exactly how the Republicans governed the last time they ruled. It took awhile for the corruption to filter down. Rep. Delay was just convicted of multiple counts of extortion, money-laundering and illegal acts, years after he ;eft Congress in disgrace.



2010-12-04 06:02:06

Jason [unverified] said:

I don't know whether this is sarcasm or a serious conversation. If it weren't for those darn Republicans being so partisan! If they would just agree with us all the bickering would stop, lol.

Just promise you won't go the route of "well Democrats did this before, true, but NEVER to this level."

The best thing that could happen now is a Republican sweep in two years, followed by all the arrogance that got the Dems run out of the office, and then a total reboot in 2016. Let's hope the anti-incumbent mentality sticks around for a while.

2010-12-04 14:01:52

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Wow. I hope I'd never get that cynical, Jason. I like consistency in public policy, and advocacy. The "gotcha" mentality that ruled today's tax debate, for instance, is lunacy.

A sweep in 2012? Here's the big obstacle (besides the vomit in my mouth):

Senate Judiciary Chairman Jeff Sessions.

Chew on that awhile. That bigoted malcontent in the direct control-path for judicial nominees?

Not while I have a breath remaining. I love the law, and the Constitution, too much.

The numbers favor a Republican Senate victory in 2012...two-thirds of the seats are Democratic.

But as we've seen, much can change in two years.

And as for our President--growing a set would help. He won a huge mandate two years ago. He seems scared to enact it. There is no shame in aggressively advocating for your view, even if you ultimately lose. I hope he realizes that in the next 18-20 months. It could be critical. The crop of potential GOP presidential nominees is scary. Only one--Gov. Romney--possesses the gravitas to occupy the Oval Office. I'm not sure he could win the nomination, thanks in no small part to the Tea Partiers' insistence on rigid ideology that defies logic.

It should be interesting.

2010-12-04 15:49:53

hendy [Member] said:

I don't care the party anymore so long as:

1) they don't take bribes, oops, I mean lobbying dollars, I mean contributions to their campaigns in excess of $500 or from sources outside their districts

2) they stabilize the economy and pay attention to reducing corporate influence in all quarters of government

3) they get off the freaking religious arguments and get onto figuring out the environment and how to reduce dependence on fossil fuels

4) they figure out how to get off the paranoia train, get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, restore civil liberties, and get out of my face with their domestic spying

5) spend money to fix infrastructure, and I don't mean airports

6) make Congress follow the rules that they make for others.

Otherwise, they can have a good time.

2010-12-04 16:02:17

Comments are closed.

Login

or Register

Search

Syndicate Blog