May I refer you to this previous post of mine, Dickey? Your pointless point of today has already been fully answered in it:

"It doesn't have anything to do with where I want to move, Dickey. I have pointed out before that people in those 3rd world countries have NEVER had the rosy set of circumstances freely given to them that you and I were given at birth, merely by being born in the USA or Canada, in far more favorable ecomomic and social conditions. And they almost certainly NEVER will.

I have no reason to want to move anywhere. I'm happy to be in Canada. Canada is safe, prosperous, and free.

You have to assess each society's progress on the present and past conditions THERE, not here, and on what is possible THERE, not here. Cuba was far better off to be under Castro than if it had stayed under Batista. The Venezuelans who voted for Chavez (a majority of them) obviously think Venezuela is better off under him, and it is the poor who vote for Chavez. It is the wealthy and the middle class who don't like him. Most Venezuelans are poor. The Nicaraguans who voted Ortega back in obviously feel they are better off that way too. You weren't there. What do you know about it that they don't?

Give up this tired old BS about me wanting to "move" somewhere, because it's absolutely stupid. Just reread this post whenever you feel tempted to say it again.

You have got to get out of this cultural thought bubble you are trapped in where you imagine that everyone in the world has the same problems and opportunities and choices in front of them that you do. THEY DON'T! They are dealing with wholly different problems and choices, and they don't view America as their saviour, they view it as their exploiter, and as a rogue nation that attacks people. That isn't the fault of ordinary Americans, it's the fault of your government, which is simply a tool of a bunch of giant corporations and a military-industrial complex which doesn't care whose life it tramples on in order to make more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$."




Sour grapes, guys? ;-) I'm still waiting for our politicians to voluntarily lower their own wages as a gesture of frugality. Remember, Ortega could have just kept drawing $10,000 a month like his predecessor, former President Enrique Bolanos. He didn't. He lowered his salary to $3,200 a month. That's a 68% reduction!

Match that. Explain to me how it proves he's a bad guy. Betcha can't.

Major case of sour grapes we have here. LOL! It's amazing how blind political (or any other kind of) prejudice works. It simply blocks out any piece of reality which does not fit its established prescription of hatred and denial.


Number 6 - So you feel that a voluntary 68% reduction in the man's salary is not enough? ;-) What would you recommend? Would you be prepared to match your own recommendation if put in the same position? I don't think I would. I don't think anyone I know would, matter of fact. I find it downright astounding that a politician would cut his wages by that amount.