No, it's not too late, Judy; thank you; I much appreciate it. Yes, part of me did get a kick out it all, and it was blissful -- and then my physiology got a KICK out of it all on a whole new level! :-D
You are quite right about my projecting an invulnerability; that is indeed a part of me, but (obviously) not the whole me. Some election results from outlying precincts come in a bit later, particularly where my body is concerned, and as I have found, they can be devastatingly uncompromising. I went to sleep that night with subtle pyrotechnics in the heart, and awoke at 5 with the full-on physical symptoms. But I will try to be more attuned faster to the outlying results and reflect a more immediately nuanced response in the future. I remember your supportive comments as well, of course. You are right, I have no impulse to go back and look, but if memory serves (which it may not), the "Bullcrap" seemed to be in response to my saying something like, what I say is not that important; what is important is the energetic connection, meaning the healing or assimilation that takes place in me (as a result of an interaction). Does that sound about right? Because I did mean that in all sincerity. I do hold my primary reason for being here as a chance for me to undergo energetic healing and assimilation. But I will (if possible) do it more cautiously and with more sensitivity, I think. As to whatever "state of consciousness" I might or might not be in, I have no idea about any of that; it's not currently of particular importance or interest to me. Thanks again. *L*L*L* R. --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > Judy, I appreciate your overture. No, I was not reading any > > posts for a few days there -- I was otherwise occupied, what > > with the ER and so on, and trying to take it easy -- and > > have not been following things religiously since, so I must > > have missed your post. I did not mean to imply here that you > > had always condemned me as a person, and in my post to you I > > believe I said I appreciate much of what you do here, and > > that includes your overall relationship with me, up until a > > few days ago. That's why I had opened my heart to you in the > > first place. I did appreciate your clarification that your > > responses only applied to specific things I had just said. > > Nonetheless, their sheer unexpected brutality hit me very > > hard. > > Um, yeah, except that you told me (1) your ego got a great > kick out of my kicking its ass. You also (2) thanked me and > said "It's (eventually) always a pleasure to see ourselves > as others see us :-)", *and* (3) that I might be right about > your egotism and that "the thought [filled you] with bliss" > (three separate posts). > > None of those remarks seems consistent with "sheer > unexpected brutality" hitting you "very hard." Maybe if > you'd showed me how you were *really* feeling at the > time of that first exchange, I'd have been more gentle > in following up. But you know, Rory, when you present > yourself as invulnerable, it sort of acts as > encouragement for people to say exactly what they think > without having to worry about your feelings. > > Anyway, now we know that whatever state of consciousness > you're in, it doesn't protect you from being terribly > wounded by negative opinions of you. > > > And I still don't understand what it was I said that > > caused you to twice call me the most egregious ego you > > had ever encountered > > You could have asked, Rory. Instead, you seemed to > welcome my comments. In any case, I never called *you* > the most egregious ego, I called remarks you made "the > most egregious *display of ego*" I had ever encountered. > That you occasionally display an ego doesn't mean > that's all you are. > > > -- almost a redundancy there, in a way, as every ego is > > egregious, "standing out from the crowd" -- followed in > > quick succession by "Bullcrap" and "phony as a three-dollar > > bill". > > Actually "Bullcrap" was first, referring to--well, you can > look the posts up if you're interested. I'm sure you won't, > but you really should go back and look at all those posts > before your misinterpretations get engraved in stone in your > memory (and before you forget about my *supportive* comments). > But maybe it's too late anyway. > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > DrD/Jim-- > > > > > > Rory has apparently chosen not to read my posts, so if I > > > may, I'd like to ask you to pass this on to him: > > > > > > He has twice seriously misrepresented what I said to him. > > > I corrected him the first time, and he appeared to > > > understand and thanked me for the "clarification." > > > > > > Then he misrepresented me again, the same way. I had to > > > correct him again, but he didn't respond to that post, so > > > I assume he didn't read it. > > > > > > Now, in his post to you, he's done it *again*, worse than > > > before. He seems determined to take my comments about two > > > very specific things he said as a total condemnation of > > > him as a person, and that's just so wrong. *That* crosses > > > a major boundary with me. > > > > > > Has nothing to do with Rory's "trying to have civil > > > conversations with Turq and Ravi." That's insulting in and > > > of itself, especially given that at one point I actually > > > *defended* him from a nasty remark of Barry's. (I also > > > supported him on more than one other occasion, but it > > > seems he's wiped those from his mind as well.) > > > > > > This post to you, DrD, will be the only overture I'll make > > > toward Rory. If he wants to straighten things out between > > > us, it's up to him now. He's welcome to contact me via email > > > if he would feel more comfortable talking privately. > > > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > > > > > OK, I am genuinely curious, Jim -- I have always enjoyed respectful and > > > > heartfelt conversations with you, and you seem to understand Judy and > > > > Ravi. I do get your saying Ravi "has a bug up his ass," but what > > > > boundary of Judy's did I cross, other than trying to have civil > > > > conversations with Turq and Ravi, to get anointed with "the most > > > > egregious ego I have ever seen," twice, followed by "Bullcrap" and > > > > "phony as a three-dollar bill"? In what way was this speaking my > > > > language? Again, on some levels this I find this very funny, but on > > > > others I do not. > > > > > > > > What I have learned from it is to keep them both at arm's length, > > > > because after having opened my heart to them as true friends, the > > > > intense physical shock felt like an actual heart attack. > > > > > > > > As some of the symptoms persisted over several days I finally went to > > > > the clinic and they sent me to the ER, but the EKG, blood tests and > > > > lung X-rays (don't ask me why they felt those were necessary) came back > > > > clean, much to my and my wife's relief. > > > > > > > > Go figure! > > > > > > > > *L*L*L* >
