--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > > <willytex@> wrote: > > > > > > off wrote: > > > > If it were not for Ron Paul, Obama would be > > > > my vote. > > > > > > > This doesn't even make any sense! > > > > Hardly a distinguishing characteristic for Off's posts. And some > days, > > its quite the fashion here on FFL. > > > > > > > > "I am absolutely determined that by the end of > > > the first term of the next president, we should > > > have universal health care in this country." > > > - Barak Obama > > > > > > Paul advocates for the elimination of federal > > > involvement and management of health care, which > > > he argues would allow prices to drop due to the > > > fundamental dynamics of a free market. > > > > Yes. The Ron/Barak difference is vast. > > > > > Not only is the difference vast between Ron and Barak, the difference > between Ron and Off World is equally vast. > > About 6 months ago I went through a litany of Paul's policies with > Off-Kilter to show him how, except for the war in Iraq, Paul was his > polar opposite. > > His response was, as usual, to spew a barrage of name-calling my way > and tell me that I am a neo-con.
I think some types of fanaticism are emotionally based. Not intellectually derived. Emotionally based and extrovertly processed. Extroverts tend to act first, think later. For such, talking and writing are not a result of having insight from some internal reflection and analysis, but rather talking / expounding are forms of sorting through the idea -- "thinking out loud". Thus in this mode, what was said 10 minutes ago, or 1 weeks ago, often has nothing to do with what is being said now. It doesn't need to make sense, its a process not a result. The old was discarded, new thoughts and ideas are being "thought out" on the public stage. Its a "shoot, ask questions later" mode. This can be "shocking" to introverts who first think, then talk. (Or, "ask questions, then shoot". No one mode is superior, and we all run up and down the various axes all day. But we have a comfort level a some point on each axes. One who is on the extreme of both i) idea generation (through emotion or analysis) and ii) idea processing (extrovert -- via talking / introvert -- via thinking) can be extreme personalities. When one develops ideas emotionally -- in contrast to intellectually -- and processes them in an extreme extrovert fashion, we have a fanatic personality. Or so I speculate. A very strong emotional/extroversion may be the basis for "bewildering fanatic" behavior as seen by others less pronounced, less extreme of their comfort zones. Particularly by those on the more extreme ranges of the introversion and thinking scales. Who may have some unorodox positions, but who presents them (finally, after a long incubation) them "more finished", more thought out, more internally consistent. Thus the impasse when Extrovert / Emotional Eddie meets Introvert / Analytical Andy at high noon. Eddie shouts out "WTF!" while Andy's inner circuitry is exploding in overtime thinnking "WTF!" Not a strong foundation for communications.
