http://youtu.be/Lf0lKxpX8Lc
--- In [email protected], merudanda <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlsr08A6sns&feature=endscreen > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlsr08A6sns&feature=endscreen> > of course the Duke is in music too here only interrupted by a too > long speech by Paul McCartney as always...... ok > let it be [:D] > --- In [email protected], merudanda <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > As it pass'd me flying by > > > > > > > > These two icons are compared quite a bit without given them a proper > > duel. Well here's how you may decide your layer of onion. > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkkYHH7oYp4 > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkkYHH7oYp4> > > > > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wd99TRgYgA&feature=related > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wd99TRgYgA&feature=related> > > > > > > > > one layer > > > > Clint Eastwood is the better total filmmaker, a well rounded filmmaker > > who is a great actor, director, and film music composer. Everyone > knows > > him to be a good actor, many know him as a great director, but few > > people realize how great his music compositions to his films are. > > > > > > second layer (or vice versa) > > > > Duke- John Wayne was a great actor no matter how many bad movies he > was > > in, and it was a lot. Still the man was a natural in front of the > camera > > and had an ease the few other actors have. Many of the mannerisms he > > used in his acting, the facial expressions and body language were > > perfect that few other actors could pull off so naturally. > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYNuwxKC02A > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYNuwxKC02A> > > > > > > > > Yeah the trouble with opinion-op-onion is if you do not want - > > challenge -one and you peel one layer off your/his/our op-onion with > the > > remaining layer > > > > you still are crying > > > > so watch-decide-and-always- weep seems be the only choice > > > > until you get rid off the last one > > > > no need of subtitle > > > > > > > > Clint Eastwood vs. John Wayne - interview fragment is from the series > > "Inside the Actors Studio" in 2003(you should see the whole sequel) > > Clint Eastwood tells how his characters differ from the ones from John > > Wayne and Clint even imitates him : ) > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_ncnL0iejo > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_ncnL0iejo> > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: > > > > > > One of the things that constantly amazes me about FFL -- and, to be > > > fair, about most other "spiritual" discussion groups as well -- is > > that > > > many of the participants seem to be reading a set of imaginary > > subtitles > > > to the posts they reply to. > > > > > > Judging from their replies, they seem to believe that the posts that > > > they are responding to have a set of subtitles that say things like > > > "This is why my ideas on this subject are RIGHT and yours are > WRONG," > > or > > > "My opinion on this matter is correct and yours is STOOOPID" or "I > > > 'know' the 'Truth' about this subject and you do not" or "There is > > > something WRONG with you if you don't believe what I believe." > > > > > > I propose this theory because that's what their replies sound like. > > They > > > almost MUST be seeing this set of imaginary subtitles, to respond to > > > simple statements of opinion as they do. > > > > > > I don't see the subtitles. I see posters on this and other forums > > often > > > merely presenting their opinions on a matter AS OPINION. There is > > often > > > NO attempt to suggest the "supremacy" of their opinion, or the > > > "rightness" of it, let alone the "wrongness" or "stupidity" of > someone > > > else's. Yet the respondents react as if such implications were, in > > fact, > > > there. > > > > > > WHY? Well, I think it's because of identification to one's own self > or > > > Ego. Some people are just SO identified with the ideas that go > through > > > their heads that they simply *cannot conceive* of there being > another > > > way of seeing an issue. These over-identified-with-their-Egos seem > to > > > believe that if anyone DOES see an issue differently, they "must" be > > > "wrong," or there "must" be something "wrong" with them. It's like > the > > > subtext of every post they write in angry response to an opinion > that > > > differs from theirs is, "You HAVE to be wrong because you're > > disagreeing > > > with ME, and I am RIGHT." > > > > > > I just don't get this. I don't feel that I am "right" about much of > > > anything. I just have opinions. I try to present them AS opinions, > > > liberally sprinkled with a garnish of "IMO's" and other such > > qualifying > > > remarks. And yet people react to them often as if I had slapped them > > > across the face with a glove and challenged them to a duel. > > > > > > I haven't. I have merely stated an opinion. Such as, for example, my > > > opinion that Robin Carlsen is a shitty writer. It's NOT as if I'm > the > > > only person here who thinks so, but IMO that doesn't matter a damn. > I > > > never set out to convince other people that Robin was a shitty > writer, > > > merely express my own OPINION that he is. And yet some -- who, I > > guess, > > > feel that he is a good writer -- have reacted to this as if I were > > > challenging them to some kind of Ego Duel, and that this "slur" on > my > > > part against Robin's good name MUST be answered, by them, and often. > > > > > > So they set out to do EXACTLY the thing that I do not. They set out > to > > > "prove" their opinion "right" and anyone who disagrees with that > > opinion > > > "wrong." Go figure. The only explanation I can come up with this is > > that > > > they are seeing subtitles that I am not. > > > > > > The whole "I am RIGHT and you are WRONG" thang seems like an > enormous > > > waste of time and energy to me. I find it difficult to understand > how > > > after 30 or 40 years of meditation anyone can still be so attached > to > > > one's self and its silly ideas as to feel as if they have to either > > > defend them or argue their supremacy over other silly ideas. It just > > > does not compute for me. > > > > > > For others, this seems to be their whole life. My *opinion* is that > > > Robin was like that, constantly feeling the need to assert his > opinion > > > as some kind of Truth. My *opinion* is that many of the people who > now > > > seem compelled to defend him and diss people who weren't much > > impressed > > > by him is that they feel exactly the same way about their own > opinions > > > and ideas. The very fact that another person has an opinion that > > differs > > > from theirs is perceived (in the imaginary subtitles) as an "attack" > > of > > > some kind on their self. And everyone knows that "attacks" have to > be > > > answered. > > > > > > Boring. Why can't people just have simple opinions, present them as > > > simple opinions, and not get their panties in a twist when someone > has > > > an opinion other than theirs? This approach just seems so much more > > > sensible than "reading the subtitles" and starting a battle to "win" > > > something that was never a battle to begin with. It was just someone > > > stating an opinion. The subtitles you read under the real post that > > > convinced you it was an invitation to an Ego Duel didn't exist. Your > > Ego > > > just imagined them there. > > > > > >
