http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/123495
--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Judy:"I think you mean Curtis's (exceptionally dishonest) > > attack on me, don't you? You know, the one in which > > he equated "angry wisdom" with road rage in order to > > demean it, and suggested that my purported anger was > > equally psychologically unbalanced as the anger of > > drivers who attack drivers with their vehicles?" > > > > Me: There was nothing dishonest in what I wrote. > > If you want to admit that simply getting angry > at another driver (as opposed to "road rage") > may be entirely justifiable because of the other > driver's careless and/or dangerous driving, and > is not necessarily a function of feeling more > powerful in the car when the driver feels powerless > in his/her personal life, fine. You could have > done that when I first commented on your post. > > If you want to admit you misused the term "road > rage" (which is not "banging on the dash and > pointing fingers at other drivers" but actually > attacking other drivers, usually with their > vehicles, as I said), fine. You could have done > that when the issue first arose. > > If you want to admit that equating "road rage" > with "angry wisdom" in an attempt to demean the > latter was a really dumb cheap shot (which I > haven't mentioned until now because I was > focusing on the first two items), fine. You > could have done that in your present post rather > than trying to accuse *me* of making a "slippery > move" because I accurately described the > dishonesties of your original post. > > You made a dishonest post, I called you on it, > and you've been dishonestly trying to defend it > ever since. > > You may be honest as the day is long in other > areas of your life, but somehow when you get > behind a keyboard and start talking about TM, or > get in an argument with a TMer, all that honesty > goes straight out the window. > > > But here you have > > made a slippery move haven't you? I was talking about people > getting > > angry behind the wheel because they feel more powerful in a car. > Later > > I made a distinction between road rage behaviors and aggressive > > driving, so I know you are aware that this is not what I said or > > meant. But it sounded better to turn it into me equating your > posting > > behavior with "attacking drivers with their vehicles' didn't it? > > > > Here is the actual post: > > I come across a lot of "angry wisdom" drivers on the Capital > Beltway. > > They pound on their dashes and point to other drivers as if every > > lane change is a personal attack on them. I have heard that road > rage > > is a way to feel powerful behind the wheel of a car when the person > > feels powerless in their personal life. Or maybe "angry wisdom" > > people are like a person carrying a hammer, so everything looks > like a > > nail to pound on. Feeling as if they are the only skilled drivers on > > the road and everyone else must be corrected to their "bad driving." > > > > "Angry wisdom", man that is a great phrase! > > >
