Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
Sorry Judy, when you justified the politics of it, you defended it. Doesn't matter what else you say about it.Saying it was disgraceful is like putting lipstick on a pig and refusing to call it a pig. From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation No, Mike, I am NOT defending the cartoon. I said it was "disgraceful." As I said, your reading comprehension is in the toilet. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, my reading comprehension is just fine and you continue to defend the cartoon by justifying it. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Your reading comprehension is getting worse and worse. I didn't defend the cartoon, I said I understood why some might do so: because the *political* point was valid. The political point had nothing to do with race. If Prissy in GWTW and/or Condi had been white, the exact same point would have been made with the same cartoon without the racial aspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.) #yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646 -- #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp #yiv6907133646hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp #yiv6907133646ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp .yiv6907133646ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp .yiv6907133646ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-mkp .yiv6907133646ad a {color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-sponsor #yiv6907133646ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6907133646 #yiv6907133646ygrp-sponsor #yiv6907133646ygrp-lc #yiv6907133646hd {margin:10px 0p
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
No, Mike, I am NOT defending the cartoon. I said it was "disgraceful." As I said, your reading comprehension is in the toilet. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, my reading comprehension is just fine and you continue to defend the cartoon by justifying it. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Your reading comprehension is getting worse and worse. I didn't defend the cartoon, I said I understood why some might do so: because the *political* point was valid. The political point had nothing to do with race. If Prissy in GWTW and/or Condi had been white, the exact same point would have been made with the same cartoon without the racial aspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so. Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists. It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.)
[FairfieldLife] California Drops Water Restrictions
It makes sense since northern California got a lot of rain from El Nino. http://http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-sharp-reversal-california-suspends-water-restrictions/ar-BBtdHdk?ocid=spartandhp http://http//www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-sharp-reversal-california-suspends-water-restrictions/ar-BBtdHdk?ocid=spartandhp
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
By your definition here, I am too limited to continue this discussion. :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Ollie, I don't expect you to have the ability to appreciate Rice's intellect or talents.That would be expecting an awfully lot of you. I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy on race. You referred to her as a *token*. Is Obama(either one) a *token*? Black and liberal = highly intelligent thoughtful person that has overcome or is overcoming racial injustice. Black conservative = Stupid Uncle Tom, Step n Fetchit, servin' da white man and in your case a token. From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 8:06 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Excuse me? Is Rice in some exalted class, that I should not even deign to disparage her? Pa-leeze. I don't buy into that mind-set. She's a dummy and a puppet, plain and simple. No big deal to me, though she was so obviously unqualified, it was more than a little embarrassing to have her representing this country. For example, even TRY to compare her to George Schultz, Dean Rusk, John Foster Dulles, Madeline Albright, John Kerry, or even Henry Kissinger, for example. She falls to the bottom of the list effortlessly, out of her depth, and then some. Michelle Obama is a beautiful, smart, well-qualified First Lady, who has done nothing except bring grace and poise to The White House. No comparison at all to the bad hire. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Well Ollie, you might as well say that she's a real *Aunt Jemima*. BTW, what has Michelle Obama ever done that is so note worthy besides parroting her husband and showing off her new clothes and taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids? For you to try to judge her intelligence is like the twenty watt light bulb saying the hundred watt ain't so bright. From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so. Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists. It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
No Ollie, I don't expect you to have the ability to appreciate Rice's intellect or talents.That would be expecting an awfully lot of you. I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy on race. You referred to her as a *token*. Is Obama(either one) a *token*? Black and liberal = highly intelligent thoughtful person that has overcome or is overcoming racial injustice.Black conservative = Stupid Uncle Tom, Step n Fetchit, servin' da white man and in your case a token. From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 8:06 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Excuse me? Is Rice in some exalted class, that I should not even deign to disparage her? Pa-leeze. I don't buy into that mind-set. She's a dummy and a puppet, plain and simple. No big deal to me, though she was so obviously unqualified, it was more than a little embarrassing to have her representing this country. For example, even TRY to compare her to George Schultz, Dean Rusk, John Foster Dulles, Madeline Albright, John Kerry, or even Henry Kissinger, for example. She falls to the bottom of the list effortlessly, out of her depth, and then some. Michelle Obama is a beautiful, smart, well-qualified First Lady, who has done nothing except bring grace and poise to The White House. No comparison at all to the bad hire. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Well Ollie, you might as well say that she's a real *Aunt Jemima*. BTW, what has Michelle Obama ever done that is so note worthy besides parroting her husband and showing off her new clothes and taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids? For you to try to judge her intelligence is like the twenty watt light bulb saying the hundred watt ain't so bright. From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if s
[FairfieldLife] Re: Change of Leadership
FW: Dear Revered Friend of Maharishi University of Management: I am going to retire as President of Maharishi University of Management on Founder's Day, September 12th, after 36 years as President. I will be devoting my time to my duties as Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, and as International President of Maharishi Universities of Management. I am proposing to the Board of Trustees that Raja John Hagelin be appointed as President of the University. He is tops in knowledge, both in science and Maharishi Vedic Science, a charismatic and inspiring figure, and has proven his administrative and marketing skills by increasing the number of people in the US learning Transcendental Meditation tenfold in just a few years. He has agreed that he is willing to do this, and I feel sure that the Board will support him in this role (he is already Honorary Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and the University's most senior faculty member, researcher, and public speaker). He has expressed his admiration for the existing faculty and administrative teams at the University who have vast experience, and feels with their help he will be able to manage everything well. He also says he already has ideas how to promote the University more, and attract more students, including building a closer relationship between Maharishi Foundation and Maharishi University of Management, and calling upon the skills and contacts of Dr. Bob Roth to raise the University's profile. This will also include greater promotion of the unique knowledge offered by the faculty of the University at special conferences Raja Hagelin will organize. He has also mentioned his desire to be able to consult with me on any issues that may come up, and I of course am very happy to do that. We will also bring out this change in the leadership during the Commencement ceremony on June 18th, without taking too much time. I do feel strongly that this is a great step of progress for Maharishi University of Management, and will lead to the faster expansion we all desire. Raja John Hagelin and I have had a chance to discuss this with Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam to gain his perspective, and he feels this is a very good move. Thank you all for your kindness and loving support through all the years! You have done and are doing so much for Maharishi University of Management and the whole world!!! Please continue your support and expand it if you can! With Best Wishes, Jai Guru Dev Bevan ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : News this morning, [ ..a quick summary of today's letter from Bevan to the Trustees and Faculty (and of course many others): In his continuing role as Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, and as International President of Maharishi Universities of Management, Bevan is resigning from his presidency of MUM, effective this Sept 12 (Founder's Day). Raja John Hagelin has accepted the position.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
Excuse me? Is Rice in some exalted class, that I should not even deign to disparage her? Pa-leeze. I don't buy into that mind-set. She's a dummy and a puppet, plain and simple. No big deal to me, though she was so obviously unqualified, it was more than a little embarrassing to have her representing this country. For example, even TRY to compare her to George Schultz, Dean Rusk, John Foster Dulles, Madeline Albright, John Kerry, or even Henry Kissinger, for example. She falls to the bottom of the list effortlessly, out of her depth, and then some. Michelle Obama is a beautiful, smart, well-qualified First Lady, who has done nothing except bring grace and poise to The White House. No comparison at all to the bad hire. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Well Ollie, you might as well say that she's a real *Aunt Jemima*. BTW, what has Michelle Obama ever done that is so note worthy besides parroting her husband and showing off her new clothes and taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids? For you to try to judge her intelligence is like the twenty watt light bulb saying the hundred watt ain't so bright. From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so. Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists. It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
No Judy, my reading comprehension is just fine and you continue to defend the cartoon by justifying it. From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Your reading comprehension is getting worse and worse. I didn't defend the cartoon, I said I understood why some might do so: because the *political* point was valid. The political point had nothing to do with race. If Prissy in GWTW and/or Condi had been white, the exact same point would have been made with the same cartoon without the racial aspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.) #yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395 -- #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp #yiv4061960395hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp #yiv4061960395ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp .yiv4061960395ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp .yiv4061960395ad p {margin:0;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-mkp .yiv4061960395ad a {color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-sponsor #yiv4061960395ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-sponsor #yiv4061960395ygrp-lc #yiv4061960395hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395ygrp-sponsor #yiv4061960395ygrp-lc .yiv4061960395ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv4061960395activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv4061960395 #yiv
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
Your reading comprehension is getting worse and worse. I didn't defend the cartoon, I said I understood why some might do so: because the *political* point was valid. The political point had nothing to do with race. If Prissy in GWTW and/or Condi had been white, the exact same point would have been made with the same cartoon without the racial aspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so. Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists. It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.)
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Thu 19-May-16 00:15:06 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 05/14/16 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 05/21/16 00:00:00 117 messages as of (UTC) 05/18/16 22:32:49 27 Mike Dixon mdixon.6569 18 awoelflebater 13 olliesedwuz 13 dhamiltony2k5 8 emily.mae50 7 jr_esq 7 Bhairitu noozguru 6 email4you mikemail4you 5 hepa7 3 'Rick Archer' rick 2 authfriend 2 William Leed WLeed3 1 yifuxero 1 wleed3 WLeed3 1 steve.sundur 1 s3raphita 1 hanumanboy1 1 Dick Mays dickmays Posters: 18 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
Danziger's inspiration for his cartoon about Condileezza Ricehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hE7w7KaKbmM Of course it wasn't racist!:) | | | | || | | | || GONE WITH THE WOMEN Poor Butterfly Mc Queen gets it every time. | | | | From: "Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 4:44 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation Well Ollie, you might as well say that she's a real *Aunt Jemima*. BTW, what has Michelle Obama ever done that is so note worthy besides parroting her husband and showing off her new clothes and taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids? For you to try to judge her intelligence is like the twenty watt light bulb saying the hundred watt ain't so bright. From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.) #yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740 -- #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp #yiv7972876740hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp #yiv7972876740ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp .yiv7972876740ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp .yiv7972876740ad p {margin:0;}#yiv7972876740 #yiv7972876740ygrp-mkp .yiv7972876740ad a {color:#00
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
Well Ollie, you might as well say that she's a real *Aunt Jemima*. BTW, what has Michelle Obama ever done that is so note worthy besides parroting her husband and showing off her new clothes and taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids? For you to try to judge her intelligence is like the twenty watt light bulb saying the hundred watt ain't so bright. From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.) #yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602 -- #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp #yiv6125831602hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp #yiv6125831602ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp .yiv6125831602ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp .yiv6125831602ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-mkp .yiv6125831602ad a {color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-sponsor #yiv6125831602ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-sponsor #yiv6125831602ygrp-lc #yiv6125831602hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602ygrp-sponsor #yiv6125831602ygrp-lc .yiv6125831602ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6125831602 #yiv6125831602actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6125
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
I didn't care for either cartoon. That said, Michelle Obama is miles ahead of Condoleeza in terms of intelligence and ability. What a failed pianist was doing as secretary of state is beyond me. As far as I could tell, her main gig was showing off all her new clothes and parroting whatever Cheney wanted her to say - a real doofus. Now she is back at Stanford, playing the token. Bah. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so. Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists. It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
It is a matter of hypocrisy Judy. Ollie suggested that a cartoon of Michelle Obama was racist because of her body mass as opposed to Trumps former model wife and I countered with the hypocrisy of the left. If you didn't notice, I followed that sentence invoking the Times and the Post with a question mark. No, it wasn't published by them but was by a syndicated cartoonist that they frequently publish and continue to do so.Let's not play stupid Judy, you know exactly what the sentiment of that cartoon was meant to convey. A black woman sitting in a rocking chair, rocking an aluminum tube as if it were a baby with a play on words from a famous movie. The line, "I don't know nothing 'bout birthing babies", mocking a simpleton, an uneducated lazy slave, one who does what the massa tells her to do. The very fact that you can defend it, while claiming you're not, is ten times lower than my not knowing that neither the Times nor the Post actually published it even though it was one of their syndicated cartoonists.It was all about hypocrisy Judy.. From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.) #yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845 -- #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp #yiv6149725845hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp #yiv6149725845ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp .yiv6149725845ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp .yiv6149725845ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-mkp .yiv6149725845ad a {color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-sponsor #yiv6149725845ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-sponsor #yiv6149725845ygrp-lc #yiv6149725845hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845ygrp-sponsor #yiv6149725845ygrp-lc .yiv6149725845ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6149725845 #yiv6149725845activity span .yiv6149725845underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6149725845 .yiv6149725845attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv6149725845 .yiv6149725845attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6149725845 .yiv6149725845attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6149725845 .yiv6149725845attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv6149725845 .yiv6149725845attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6149725845 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#
[FairfieldLife] Change of Leadership
News this morning, [ ..a quick summary of today's letter from Bevan to the Trustees and Faculty (and of course many others): In his continuing role as Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, and as International President of Maharishi Universities of Management, Bevan is resigning from his presidency of MUM, effective this Sept 12 (Founder's Day). Raja John Hagelin has accepted the position.
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Anyone Who Cares
Yes, certainly more well-rounded in personality! I am generally ignorant about Hinduism. This is entertaining and informative. Rakshasa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rakshasa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rakshasa Rakshasa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rakshasa A Rakshasa (Sanskrit: rākṣasa) is a demonic being from Hindu mythology. As mythology made its way into other religions, the rakshasa was later incorp... View on en.wikipedia.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rakshasa Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : The amount of time and energy Drumpf has spent extolling himself for his "richness" and inflating his financial truth to a point of extreme absurdity is certainly one of a host of reasons he can't and won't release his tax returns. Notice the expression on his face? He's peddling his "presidential" face now. Lol. He is so phony through and through that it astounds me over and over how many people have bought into him as "anti-establishment" and "real." The con continues. If there is a "rakshasa" in this race, it would be Drumpf. Yes and no. Drumpf isn't interesting enough to be a rakshasha. Drumpf is repetitive, boring and annoying. Real evil would be fascinating, arresting and captivating. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true
Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation
For you to suggest the cartoon was published in the New York Times or Washington Post when you knew it wasn't was pretty low, Mike. And I just got done saying myself that the accuracy of the caption wasn't relevant. I don't know what "sentiment" the cartoon was intended to evoke, and neither do you. The political point, though, was valid, and I would guess that's why some defended it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : No Judy, I didn't need a source. I remember the controversy it caused. Whether it was published in a news paper or not, it was defended by liberal bloggers and people in the media and there was more than just that one cartoon. The accuracy of the caption is irrelevant. It's the sentiment that it intended to evoke, that she was a stupid, uneducated, black woman, still on the plantation. WWW.iwf.org/media/2434659/IWF-Denounces-Racist-Depictions-of-Dr-Condoleezza-Rice-in-Popular-Editorial-Cartoons From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Consolation ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : (snip) A cartoon about Michelle being big and husky?How about the one with Condolezza Rice crying *I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' tubes* while rocking ion a chair with a rag tied around her head as if she were a slave in Gone With The Wind. Was that New York Times or Washington Post? H? That disgraceful cartoon was never published in a newspaper, only on the cartoonist's Web site. So much for the accuracy of your right-wing sources. (You have the caption wrong too, but it doesn't make any difference.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan retiring
um...was it something I said?? :-) Great news. Thanks for doing the right thing Mr. Morris. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Dear Members of the Faculty: I am going to retire as President of Maharishi University of Management on Founder’s Day, September 12th, after 36 years as President. I will be devoting my time to my duties as Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, and as International President of Maharishi Universities of Management. I am proposing to the Board of Trustees that Raja John Hagelin be appointed as President of the University. He is tops in knowledge, both in science and Maharishi Vedic Science, a charismatic and inspiring figure, and has proven his administrative and marketing skills by increasing the number of people in the US learning Transcendental Meditation tenfold in just a few years… not to mention his leadership of the Dr. David Lynch Foundation! He has agreed that he is willing to do this, and I feel sure that the Board will support him in this role (he is already Honorary Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and the University’s most senior faculty member, researcher, and public speaker). He has expressed his admiration for the existing faculty and administrative teams at the University who have vast experience, and feels with their help he will be able to manage everything well. He also says he already has ideas how to promote the University more, and attract more students, including building a closer relationship between Maharishi Foundation and Maharishi University of Management, and calling upon the skills and contacts of Dr. Bob Roth to raise the University’s profile. This will also include greater promotion of the unique knowledge offered by the faculty of the University at special conferences Raja Hagelin will organize. He has also mentioned his desire to be able to consult with me on any issues that may come up, and I of course am very happy to do that. We will also bring out this change in the leadership during the Commencement ceremony on June 18th, without taking too much time. I do feel strongly that this is a great step of progress for Maharishi University of Management, and will lead to the faster expansion we all desire. Raja John Hagelin and I have had a chance to discuss this with Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam to gain his perspective, and he feels this is a very good move. Thank you all for your kindness and loving support through all the years! You are the greatest intellectuals of this age,, and the gifts you give to the future leaders of the world and to the world as a whole are beyond measure. I appreciate you so much. With Best Wishes Jai Guru Dev Bevan
[FairfieldLife] Bevan retiring
Dear Members of the Faculty: I am going to retire as President of Maharishi University of Management on Founder’s Day, September 12th, after 36 years as President. I will be devoting my time to my duties as Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, and as International President of Maharishi Universities of Management. I am proposing to the Board of Trustees that Raja John Hagelin be appointed as President of the University. He is tops in knowledge, both in science and Maharishi Vedic Science, a charismatic and inspiring figure, and has proven his administrative and marketing skills by increasing the number of people in the US learning Transcendental Meditation tenfold in just a few years… not to mention his leadership of the Dr. David Lynch Foundation! He has agreed that he is willing to do this, and I feel sure that the Board will support him in this role (he is already Honorary Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and the University’s most senior faculty member, researcher, and public speaker). He has expressed his admiration for the existing faculty and administrative teams at the University who have vast experience, and feels with their help he will be able to manage everything well. He also says he already has ideas how to promote the University more, and attract more students, including building a closer relationship between Maharishi Foundation and Maharishi University of Management, and calling upon the skills and contacts of Dr. Bob Roth to raise the University’s profile. This will also include greater promotion of the unique knowledge offered by the faculty of the University at special conferences Raja Hagelin will organize. He has also mentioned his desire to be able to consult with me on any issues that may come up, and I of course am very happy to do that. We will also bring out this change in the leadership during the Commencement ceremony on June 18th, without taking too much time. I do feel strongly that this is a great step of progress for Maharishi University of Management, and will lead to the faster expansion we all desire. Raja John Hagelin and I have had a chance to discuss this with Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam to gain his perspective, and he feels this is a very good move. Thank you all for your kindness and loving support through all the years! You are the greatest intellectuals of this age,, and the gifts you give to the future leaders of the world and to the world as a whole are beyond measure. I appreciate you so much. With Best Wishes Jai Guru Dev Bevan
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Anyone Who Cares
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : The amount of time and energy Drumpf has spent extolling himself for his "richness" and inflating his financial truth to a point of extreme absurdity is certainly one of a host of reasons he can't and won't release his tax returns. Notice the expression on his face? He's peddling his "presidential" face now. Lol. He is so phony through and through that it astounds me over and over how many people have bought into him as "anti-establishment" and "real." The con continues. If there is a "rakshasa" in this race, it would be Drumpf. Yes and no. Drumpf isn't interesting enough to be a rakshasha. Drumpf is repetitive, boring and annoying. Real evil would be fascinating, arresting and captivating. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Anyone Who Cares
The amount of time and energy Drumpf has spent extolling himself for his "richness" and inflating his financial truth to a point of extreme absurdity is certainly one of a host of reasons he can't and won't release his tax returns. Notice the expression on his face? He's peddling his "presidential" face now. Lol. He is so phony through and through that it astounds me over and over how many people have bought into him as "anti-establishment" and "real." The con continues. If there is a "rakshasa" in this race, it would be Drumpf. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true
[FairfieldLife] Trump, Hillary or Sanders: Seven reasons why our next president should meditate
1. Slow down the mind. Hillary Clinton is on record saying she meditates to slow things down and cool the mind. A recent survey that my colleagues and I conducted on over 600 Transcendental Meditation (TM) practitioners supports this benefit. Most respondents (92%) said that, since starting to meditate, they felt a sense of stillness in the presence of activity. Here’s how storied hedge fund owner Ray Dalio, a decades-long TM practitioner, describes how this benefits his negotiations: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/17/trump-hillary-or-sanders-seven-reasons-why-our-next-president-should-meditate.html ** ~~ e n j o y ~~~ *
[FairfieldLife] For Anyone Who Cares
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/just-how-rich-is-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true