From:

http://www.radiotalkingpoints.com/ar...itaD unn.html

Mao Tse Tung (Mao Zedong)?


Do activists, dream of the day they can bring China to the
international court and charge political descendants of Mao with
genocide? Or is that the flavor of the Bush bashing month that we
don't believe in fair laws, but only the ones we can enforce, or get
away with? From what little I know of the Bush family, I sense a
humility and lack of defense, of whatever you want to say about them.
If I wrote this letter in China (which I would not), then you would be
reading about someone getting a shot in the head?

Bill Maher said he wished the United States was like China? If he was
rotting in prison, would he say that, right before they put him under
the knife, to remove his organs? Would they wake him up? That's not a
very good political policy, and only a temporary solution, the drugs
they use for the process, do irreversible damage, resulting in death
in months? Well, they write entire books on social behaviors, and
there is a political sickness when crime is more industrious than
work? It makes little sense to fix what is not broken?

While you ponder that rot gut, there is a smear campaign to charge the
military in Iraq of genocide, and yet somehow they choose to ignore
the Chinese agenda. So we say, Kuwait, an inconvenient truth? Getting
back to Mao Zedong, this is a disturbing fellow. First of all the
reference to Maoism vision of government is a "continuing revolution".
Well, the United States Constitution is the framework for our
"continuing revolution", so I find the stretch that this fellow was
someone to admire fairly revolting.

Why is he revolting? This was not a political revolution, this was the
rape of a nation? Deng Xiaoping took power after 1976, and abandoned
many of the Mao policies? Why is this fellow this alarming? Mao tried
his revolutionary ideas through grass roots organizations first
through the industrial labor attempt at organizing, and when this
failed, when to the uneducated, poor youth to go after the government
(he was already on the run?) through the use of force. He assumed that
his peaceful struggle against feudalism (rich ruling the poor) would
not resolve his differences and instead opted for plans to use force.

The difference however in America would be the reverse of China, you
would target the poor and the uneducated in the cities, instead of the
rural areas? Is this why the press is so important in making sure even
the uneducated are informed? In any event, the geography that allowed
Mao to succeed in China, would not be present in America (for all you
military wanna bees), also 60 years later, military science has
progressed to the point that wars are to be avoided, not embraced.

Mao has been coined with a term called opportunism, which is basically
seizing every opportunity to increase one's political influence. Mr.
Obama is one who does practice that, although such tactics will not
work in America simply because of the ethical values of voters, high
degree of informational awareness, and a system of checks and balances
that prevent the use of such tactics from succeeding (this is not
something new). I have noticed however a trend in the educational
system to attempt at eroding some of the cultural and political
expectations that could make opportunism appear to be more effective,
and that is being reversed as well.

Mao combined his views of opportunism with kulakism, which was
basically looting. Killing not only occurred but was accompanied by
torture such as shoving glowing gun barrels into the orifices of
victims, or simply gutting them alive. This mass murderer continued
other policies such as wanting to hear alternative viewpoints about
how to run the government, called the Hundred Flowers Campaign, which
was only a ruse to discover who his critics were, and then kill them.

Mao instituted the "Great Leap Forward", which brought about
experimental financial endeavors such as banning private ownership of
business, but largely failed, and was accompanied by terrified
citizens distorting the numbers in order to create the impression of
false gains, most likely to avoid being tortured. He also created a
large number of public works projects, all of which crumbled into
rubble, since they were built ignoring the use of trained engineers,
which he thought were useless (wasting millions of citizens years of
life in hard labor).

Mao was ultimately responsible for an estimated 20 to 70 million
deaths, either by direct murder, or indirect starvation from various
public policy initiatives. One could conclude from the history that if
it were not for Japanese Imperialism, he might not have ever rose to
power. Wild distortions in Feudalism and Capitalism were only concepts
that could be explained to the youth who were not educated, and likely
to perform in gang like activity, upon which the common denominator in
the mass extinction of Chinese citizens occurred? How is that 70
percent high school drop out rate working for you now, Sheila Jackson
Lee? Got you a white girl Mao fan in the White House?

Perhaps what is more disturbing is anyone who would follow these
theories of communism, that destroy the weak, instead of protect them?
I am not a current study of Chinese history, so I will leave it here
for today, this was largely taken from Wikipedia, on the Internet. Mr.
Obama should also take comfort that Mao believed in nuclear warfare?
Prostitution was a cultural nuance that also allowed Mao to ascend to
power, by getting the support of women who wanted it abolished, and
was a major factor in Japanese Imperialism (and to this day,
concubines are still commonly a major occupation, if you call it
that)?

Supporters of Mao point to increased life expectancy (after you got
your mind right), although they don't point out that this happened on
a global scale in other governments, and was not a special outcome of
the Mao form of government, but the spread of more sanitary ways of
living. Increased literacy rates are hard to gauge when compared to
other governments, just what citizens were even allowed to read does
not even come into the discussion, and there is a big difference
between being able to read, and being able to pursue the ability to
communicate, or even innovate.

The days of another Mao appearing are highly unlikely, simply because
of the emergence of so much wealth, and wide spread education of how
failed policies in the past are to be avoided. One could conjecture
that current climate change debates may fuel the rise of another Mao
type figure, and again, the widespread knowledge of warfare, and
wealth, will prevail in preventing any resurgence of such figures in
the future. He may still be an influence in today's culture, although
perhaps as more of an inspiration to create social monsters, such as
in the Star Trek series where they meet a cybernetic race called the
Borg, who are not Swedish, but do dance to the tune of one mind.

There are many scientific studies not conducted on sociological
impacts of various things in my opinion, and it is obvious to me, that
the free minds of liberty, will always be superior than the shackled
minds of authoritarian figures, simply out of motivational reasons.
Fear can always provoke a fight, but creativity is what will lead us
to the stars. One can only wonder at those heavenly riches, while
looking at the rainbow, and ask ourselves, God promised not to destroy
us, and if he is able to make that promise, so must we all?

We should beware that the pursuit of "internet neutrality" is an
effort to pursue another Mao ascention or preventing the education of
voters on the issues? Dumb voters are dangerous voters?

Resistance if futile, you must comply.......with the truth!

Can you smell el el el el el el el el el .........what the Rock of
Truth, who has the smartest eyebrow in the Universe, and the whitest
teeth known to man, is ............................cooking?

Being that this is the most exciting, most entertaining, fact finding,
brain busting, fun loving, liberal egg shell mind crunching,
invincible smacketh downeth erectus amongus, you can't see the truth
coming, but you know it is anyway, sonic boom of Conservatism, and,
most powerful keyboard in the world,


do you feel lucky?

Universal Disclaimer for the Public Domain, Version 1.4, dated Oct
10th, 2009

a) The views expressed by this website and the author to include all
electronic forms of communication are not representative of
advertisers, or other third parties that may store and or transmit the
messages from this private computer, which you may observe at your own
risk, with no liability to the authors, or any party related to
transmitting, storing, or any other aspect of the material involved,
including email correspondence, which is not necessary to the function
of the website, and may or may not be archived. No personal
information exchanged will be shared without your consent, or provided
to third parties with out the express permission of the parties and,
or, individuals concerned.

b) The author(s) of this content and those who may interact with it in
various known or unknown electronic methods do not give permission to
any third parties to share or provide private personal information who
may operate as part of the internet communications system, including
all parties, who may technically intercept communications due to the
nature of network conditions beyond both the author's legal and
physical control, unless those communications represent violations of
the law, upon which the author, and or web site will cooperate to
pursue any legal remedies.

c) The views expressed by the author or website may or may not contain
factual information, due to the use of sarcasm or parody. The views
may or may not be complete, either by design, to pre-empt being called
a liar even if telling the truth, or by error due to typographical,
grammer, or other technical communication problems not realized or
imagined, or the possibility of views based on false or missing
information, or with the intention of being used for entertainment
purposes only, and not as a definitive judgement on the actions,
character, or reputation of an organization, individual, or groups of
individuals, with the intent of communicating with a limited group of
people, and not the general public, however no distribution
restrictions apply for fair use purposes described by the US Copyright
Office, if no other restrictions are present or communicated, with all
commercial proceeds associated with the distribution of the content to
remain the sole possesion of the original author.

d) Any humor if used, is not intended to offend people, and may be
designed to apply the principals of peer pressure through reverse
examination to accomplish the communication of principals or ideas
that consist of traditional or proposed social values that are proven
to advance the common good, and are not meant to discredit, disparage
or demean any person or entities in any professional or personal
manner, by attempting to share through the eyes or opinion of the
author, for which it is expected that you read at your own risk, with
no liability held to the author or any third parties who may store,
transfer, or forward this message to others, in the traditions of free
speech, fair use, and to play a positive role in a society that
believes that graphically depicting male homosexuals having sex, and
other unusual sex acts is considered free speech or that the use of
abortion to limit Negros, Latinos, and other races from "spreading the
wealth around" as a "matter of privacy" (which the author does not
condone).

e)The use of humor is a known ingredient in providing teachable
moments, and to validate and even demonstrate artistic expressions
that are not shared by others, as demonstrated by many valuable
scientific observations that were scoffed at in the past, yet proven
to be quite valid decades later, upon which the humor used in all
electronic communications by the author are based, in the principals
and traditions of free speech and pursuit of happiness, and may not be
a representation of others, including God.

f) Additional use of automated anonymous page use tracking computer
scripts (web page programs) may be licensed by www.google.com, for
bandwidth verification or potential advertisement opportunities or
incorporation of web master tools in the future.

g) Advertisements that may appear are not necessarily endorsed by the
author, either by admission, or by silence, nor are related links,
that may be provided for all or any of the following known or unknown
purposes, but not limited to, informational, educational, and for the
purpose of giving copy right credit referal information under the
terms outlined in the conditions applied to the term "fair use"
regarding conversations and print under US Copy Right Law.

h) It is the opinion of the author that effective 1 December, 2009,
the proposed regulations from the FTC violate the first and fifth
amendments of the United States Constitution, by infringing through
economic affliction the burden without compensation all financial
details concerning the communications of both free enterprise and
opinion, and other civil rights such as "punishment must be fair" and
not at the "discretion" of public officials, or that advertisers are
assumed to be guilty of deception when United States law provides that
you are innocent before being proven guilty, and are in fact
demonstrations that there are current members of Congress that neither
understand the spirit of the law our founding fathers made for the
United States of America, or understand how they work in the opinion
of the author, as of October 10th, 2009, especially in light of
anticipated, and hopefully defeated, legislative taxes relating to
energy use and the burden of publishers and advertisers to comply with
the law and manage the environment, and in light that there are
various consumer protection agencies, including the Better Business
Bureau, which has free consumer information.

i)Although the content provided meets or exceeds those new
requirements to the knowledge of the author, and modifications to
version 1.3 of this disclaimer is a result of the opinion of the
author that blogging is another definition for a potentially infinite
number or forms of electronic communication, as such the author will
retroactively apply this version, 1.4 to all forms of previous
communications, when and wherever possible, as time allows, in order
to properly convey the intention of the author and to demonstrate an
enthusiasm to comply with the law, and not enthusiastically pursue
getting high on cocaine as often as possible as Barack Hussein Obama
has admitted in his book (paraphrase, synopsis), according to (mmm,
mmm, mmm (sonic emphasis)) Rush Hudson Limbaugh, (mmm mmm mmm (sonic
emphasis)).

j) Use of this disclaimer for either personal or professional use is
permitted with no restrictions. These restrictions or disclaimers do
not prohibit the author from pursuing or communicating in a truthful
manner, or guarantee that the audience will understand all things as
intended, and, or result in being called incoherent, or even a Chicken
Chaser

These are a bunch of slanderous accusations and lies that the author
cannot defend. Life expectancy went up in China because Socialism was
making peoples lives so much better. In India life expectancy did not
go up. China had relatively small prison populations compared with
percentages of incarcated people under Mao. The USA has the highest in
the world. No, shooting people who didn't believe an orthodoxy is not
what was happening in China. In 1976 Mao Died and the Capitalists
staged a coup, in which the condemned Mao's own wife (who was a hero
of the revolution) put her on trial and she died in prison. During the
time of the Chinese revolution mass protest occurred thorought the
world in favor of socialism and revloution, and in favor of the
Chinese Revolution in the 1960s. China was the only government that
encouraged criticism and rebellion against people in power carrying
out oppressive and elitist polices. In 1949 only 155 of the population
of China could read, In 1976 it was 80%.

The most interesting thing about your post is that people in the USA
are having to slander and attack Mao Tse Tung and the Chinese
Revolution, because people the world over are having serious questions
whether to throw out Capitalism as a economic and political system.