[FairfieldLife] Re: It's official -- the most mediocre dreams on the planet
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Better than living with the delusion that I've actually seen people levitate in former cults I've been associated with. Whom may I ask, has seen someone levitate? I've seen hundreds and have levitated about 10 yards in one go myself, on several occasions. Soon thousands will float. Well, either Nablusoss is lying or he is delusional. Anyone disagree? He does seem to have used scare quotes. Anyone want to leap to his defense? I tend to lean towards delusion: you have a group of people together, all pumped up, firmly believing that the hops are levitations. Or, more likely, that they're the first stage of a sequence of developments that ends with levitation. I'm not sure about more likely I was correcting Ruth's notion of what TBs believe. Ah! I lean towards the idea that yogic flying is some sort of brain/body togetherness that lets you tap into hidden energy. I'd buy that as one possible explanation. I don't know *what* the hell it is, but it's not just a case of mass suggestion, people just doing ordinary hopping and thinking it's something else, as Ruth seems to believe. Personally, I think it's more than *just* delusion but only so far as brain and body working together somehow. Big shame DOJ and the boys haven't bothered to check this out as it's world shattering news if it's levitating, even if only a little bit. I wouldn't rule out mass suggestion either, TM is a powerful belief system and everyone knows what flying is supposed to look like we could easily be kidding ourselves. Just try doing it *without* the belief that it's something special and see how far you get. I think the idea that it's levitation part 1 is unlikely simply because YF has such a distinct set of phases it goes through. First is the mad hopping and sweating and farmyard noises, then you get the hang of it and just leap about assuming you get even that far. Finally it just settles into a rythm and you get the same scene in every flying room, half the people just sitting around and the rest just twitching. If it was going to end up with levitation surely there would be some sort of momentum in everyone getting more lively or at least the ME helping even the non-flyers off the ground? The only reason I'd go that far is because I could always do it without getting out of breath, And by oneself. And there's what they call the impulse, which has always been very strong for me. And other distinctly altered-state experiences. but am we kidding ourselves? It would be piss easy to demonstrate but I don't remember reading it had been done. It doesn't matter how far you fly but whether you travel in a parabolic curve, in ten years I never saw anyone even remotely break the laws governing bodies moving through the air. I saw some who had perfected the hop to the point of physical poetry. Surely after thirty years they, at least, would be airborne. Unless you've experienced Yogic Flying, it's probably not a great idea to make suggestions about what's really happening. I don't know if anyone listened to the radio clip about yogic flying I posted earlier but it's interesting for a few reasons: it doesn't mention the ME and it doesn't claim that yogic flying is the first stage of levitation. I think that is the best you can say about it at the moment. I haven't listened to it. What do they say about it, if not that it's the first stage of levitation, or that it generates the ME? They say just what I think, that it's a brain/body synchronisation that makes meditation deeper. I've no doubt they are just being media-savvy and not scaring the locals away from their new development but it's nice to hear they can drop the hyperbole. Unless it's a new improved TMO we are dealing with. I always hope the optimists are right and we end up levitating because it means I already know how to do it! I'm not going to hold my breath though. I think the laws of physics are safe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
(snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. The Clinton's seem fine with making lot's of money. Is she really that 'broke' now? Don't think so. Her ego has fallen a notch or two, and Bill is still making speeches. Where is the problem. Obama is a better speaker, more intelligent, more universal leader for the United States and the World. Hillary will do alright; I wouldn't worry about her finances too much. Why would you?
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- On Mon, 7/14/08, nablusoss1008 wrote: This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. Yeah, Mytria will demonstrate flying real soon. Nabs, you crack me up. You confuse your thoughts with reality. I'd love to see a TM-sidha fly, but it ain't happenin' unless you've been drinking the koolaid! Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) That's my feeling as well. There is a wealth of material there to make fun of, but it would be like mocking someone who is dying. That, actually, is my take on what's driving this last set of outbursts -- Nabby's having a mortality attack, has grown painfully aware that he'll die alone and probably penniless, and is angry at anyone who even suggests that he might have wasted his life believing the things that he believes, or who questions the things he believes. So he con- siders them less than beggars in the street and considers himself the only person who knows The Truth, and lashes out at those he perceives as his enemies, and less than he is. His choice. Both for setting up the circumstances of his own death, and his next life. It may just be me, but I think it's wiser to be perfectly comfortable with the possibility that I *have* wasted my life, and that *everything* I ever believed was wrong. There is freedom in that, and an openness to learning something *else* that's completely wrong in the future. :-) My path leaves me room to continue learning; Nabby's leaves him only room enough to shout to the fools he sees around him that he knows every- thing worth knowing already, and that they don't. I suspect that everyone here can see how happy that choice has made him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
Obama's stiff upper lip during HIllary's long path of realization that she won't be the nominee, nor the VP, is proving he has wisdom, discipline and patience necessary for the job. It seems that much of Hillary's campaign debt has to be paid back to her wealthy supporters who ' leant ' funds after they had already maxed out their individual federal campaign contribution limit of $2500 per donor per race. From the very beginning of Hillary's campaign, Hillary relied on big money contributors who quickly maxed out. The strategy to rely on big money, her and Bill's name recognition, a retarded sitting lame-duck Republican president and a terribly weak Republican field bred hubris and overconfidence on Hillary's part. On March 22, I wrote that when HRC is denied the Dem VP slot, an indignant HRC will team with McCain as his VP. She underestimates the public's exhaustion from the never- ending Clinton dramas. Such a move would be her Waterloo, and would ruin Bill's speech circuit career. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. The Clinton's seem fine with making lot's of money. Is she really that 'broke' now? Don't think so. Her ego has fallen a notch or two, and Bill is still making speeches. Where is the problem. Obama is a better speaker, more intelligent, more universal leader for the United States and the World. Hillary will do alright; I wouldn't worry about her finances too much. Why would you?
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches!� Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? (snip) This is exactly the warning that the sutras warn about: Where is there a *warning* against performing teh siddhis in te samaadhaav upasargaa vyutthaane siddhayaH ?? IMO, it makes samaadhi *stronger* if it's challenged. A bit like evolution, survival of the fittest, in challenging circumstances: **prasaMkhyaane 'pi akusiidasya** sarvathaa viveka-khyaater *dharma-meghaH samaadhiH*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: Why wouldn't someone with their own real power base be placed as VP on the ticket ? Obama wants his power base to be the only one. Are you inferring that HILLARY will not be placed on the ticket BECAUSE she has her own real power base ? I think it's very unlikely he'd pick her, at least partly for that reason.. If you could determine Hillary's thinking at this time Is she be thinking that she will be given the right of first refusal for the Democratic VP slot ? As far as Hillary's thinking goes, she'll do whatever she thinks is best for the Democratic Party. If she and Obama agreed privately that his publicly giving her first refusal--on condition that she refused--would be good for the party, she'd go along with that gesture. I doubt Obama would go that far, however. He's interested in what's good for Obama. The above is OPINION. However, I think everyone here knows that if someone had said the same things about Hillary Clinton -- and they could, with considerably greater accuracy -- that Judy would be calling them LIARS for saying it. When Judy expresses an OPINION, somehow it comes out as if she is speaking pure Truth, as if she has convinced herself that she knows, and anyone who disagrees with her doesn't. But when someone else expresses an OPINION that Judy doesn't like, they aren't just mistaken, they are LYING. Interesting, doncha think? Judy, *my* OPINION is that you project onto the people you don't like the very things you can't face in yourself. I have never encountered a person on this planet who is more interested only in what she thinks is good for herself than you. I've never encountered a person who fears what she perceives as other people's power base than you. You are basically accusing Obama of acting like YOU. And I'm not lying. This is what I actually believe about you. Lying doesn't even enter into the equation. That's just you avoiding dealing with the fact that someone really DOES believe this of you, and with reason.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. Ruth, you will be missed. As for that certain poster, she is merely doing what she has done on this forum and other forums for years. To put things in perspective for you -- and this is my OPINION -- Judy has this territory thang going on with the forums she participates in. She's like a dog going around peeing on trees to mark her territory. Her...uh...dogging of you and constant attempts to lure you into a head- to-head argument with her weren't necessarily personal, it's just what she DOES to mark her territory. In your case she tried to lure you into head-to- head arguments more than she does some others because 1) you make more sense than she does, 2) people believe what you say, whereas they don't believe what she says, and most important 3) you're a woman. Judy has a history of attempting to drive any strong woman off of any forum she is part of. It started back on a.m.t., and continues to this day. In this respect, she is in my opinion more of a guy than the guys are. It must be her butch side coming out. Anyway, I for one will be sorry to see you go. I understand that you don't believe that I really experienced some of the things I've talked about, and that's just fine in my opinion. I don't really expect anyone to believe them. But I do respect the integrity and the just-the-facts-maam 'tude you brought to Fairfield Life, and will miss it. On reflection, chalk up one more win for Judy Stein. Her tarbaby act -- trying ANYTHING she can think of to lure the people she's threatened by into head-to-head confrontations with her -- has claimed another victim. Who WOULDN'T get tired of some bitch dogging their every step and trying to provoke a fight? I commiserate. Judy Stein has been attempting to lure me into arguments for over 15 years. She follows me from Internet forum to Internet forum doing so. She has done the same with several folks here, as they would be more than willing to tell you. Most of us have found some way to deal with the fact that what WE are dealing with is a form of insanity, to not take it personally, and just keep posting anyway, trying to ignore her attacks and her provocations. But I completely understand the wisdom of the graceful retreat, and just leaving the barking bitch behind. Good luck to you, wherever you go...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
On Jul 15, 2008, at 2:08 AM, mainstream20016 wrote: On March 22, I wrote that when HRC is denied the Dem VP slot, an indignant HRC will team with McCain as his VP. She underestimates the public's exhaustion from the never- ending Clinton dramas. Such a move would be her Waterloo, and would ruin Bill's speech circuit career. Yeah, but it *would* be interesting! Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's official -- the most mediocre dreams on the planet
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's OK with you please post the link again and I'll give it a more thorough listening. Thanks Nabby I always appreciate people listening even if they conclude my music is not for them for any reason. I am following my own muse and don't expect to be everybody's cup of tea! Liking my music is not a prerequisite for my liking you. Here is my myspace page where I have posted a few songs from my CDs. http://tinyurl.com/6kunt6 I did listen to Ry's CD and can appreciate his musical diversity which is much broader than my own. I loved his work with Malian artist Ali Farke Toure the most. You can hear bits of it here: http://tinyurl.com/699cvf I gravitate towards simple roots music. I did listen to it again and find it to be very well executed. It still is not music that fascinates me but it's probably just the genre. To discuss taste in music is impossible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Mon, 7/14/08, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. Yeah, Mytria will demonstrate flying real soon. Nabs, you crack me up. You confuse your thoughts with reality. I'd love to see a TM-sidha fly, but it ain't happenin' unless you've been drinking the koolaid! Fortunately you have no idea what is going on in certain flying-halls, because if you did you'd be quick in presenting wild rumours to make it fit into your petty, little reality.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Kashmir Savism - the world is not an illusion.
On Jul 14, 2008, at 9:19 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote: You haven't posted a shred of evidence that would prove this claim, Vaj. From what I've read, the Marshy taught all the students of Swmai Laksmanjoo the TM technique, including the Laksmanjoo himself. Vaj wrote: More BS from Willy. Kashmer Saivism seems to agree perfectly with many of the things Marshy proposed. According to Theos Bernard, in his classic textbook on Hindu Philosophy, says that Kashmer Saivism potulates a single ultimate reality with two aspects, one transcendental and the other immanent. Marshy seems to agree with this. Actually the Maharishi advocated a tantric approach to Advaita Vedanta, seen from the POV of Advaita Vedanta. Advaita Vedanta is foundationally different from the Trika/Kashmir Shaivism. They're so different, Swami Lakshman Joo devotes a whole chapter to it in one of his works.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- On Tue, 7/15/08, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2008, 6:47 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Mon, 7/14/08, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. Yeah, Mytria will demonstrate flying real soon. Nabs, you crack me up. You confuse your thoughts with reality. I'd love to see a TM-sidha fly, but it ain't happenin' unless you've been drinking the koolaid! Fortunately you have no idea what is going on in certain flying-halls, because if you did you'd be quick in presenting wild rumours to make it fit into your petty, little reality. No Nabs, my reality is not petty. I like the truth. If people were flying, that would be wonderful and great. And I hope they do fly someday. But after over 30 years..30 FRIGGIN' YEARS...of people practicing the siddhis, NOT A SINGLE ONE IS FLYING. Do you actually think the TMO would keep a lid on this? This would be the story that would shake the world. Tell me, have you actually seen someone fly in a TMO flying hall? No you haven't. So, end of story. And as far as that poster claiming the TMO kicked a guy out of the Fairfield flying hall because he was flying. Not even worth a response To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
Turq, I saw you pause, as it were, before you used the word dogging. Pretty funny my friend!!! --- On Tue, 7/15/08, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2008, 3:43 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. Ruth, you will be missed. As for that certain poster, she is merely doing what she has done on this forum and other forums for years. To put things in perspective for you -- and this is my OPINION -- Judy has this territory thang going on with the forums she participates in. She's like a dog going around peeing on trees to mark her territory. Her...uh...dogging of you and constant attempts to lure you into a head- to-head argument with her weren't necessarily personal, it's just what she DOES to mark her territory. In your case she tried to lure you into head-to- head arguments more than she does some others because 1) you make more sense than she does, 2) people believe what you say, whereas they don't believe what she says, and most important 3) you're a woman. Judy has a history of attempting to drive any strong woman off of any forum she is part of. It started back on a.m.t., and continues to this day. In this respect, she is in my opinion more of a guy than the guys are. It must be her butch side coming out. Anyway, I for one will be sorry to see you go. I understand that you don't believe that I really experienced some of the things I've talked about, and that's just fine in my opinion. I don't really expect anyone to believe them. But I do respect the integrity and the just-the-facts-maam 'tude you brought to Fairfield Life, and will miss it. On reflection, chalk up one more win for Judy Stein. Her tarbaby act -- trying ANYTHING she can think of to lure the people she's threatened by into head-to-head confrontations with her -- has claimed another victim. Who WOULDN'T get tired of some bitch dogging their every step and trying to provoke a fight? I commiserate. Judy Stein has been attempting to lure me into arguments for over 15 years. She follows me from Internet forum to Internet forum doing so. She has done the same with several folks here, as they would be more than willing to tell you. Most of us have found some way to deal with the fact that what WE are dealing with is a form of insanity, to not take it personally, and just keep posting anyway, trying to ignore her attacks and her provocations. But I completely understand the wisdom of the graceful retreat, and just leaving the barking bitch behind. Good luck to you, wherever you go... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- (snip) Where is there a *warning* against performing teh siddhis in (Snip) I was thinking that when Maharishi used the 'Capture the Fort' analogy, he was speaking of this. That there are many powers that one could concentrate and forget the goal... Enlightenment. So, in many ways, the siddis techniques which go have the effect you are saying... In many ways, one could be confused, in that 'are we here to levitate, to prove something to somebod... or Are we here to transcend, and become enlightened?
Re: [FairfieldLife] I quit
On Jul 14, 2008, at 3:03 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. A special thanks to Curtis who is both funny and perceptive, to Jim/Sandiego for answering every question I ever asked, and to Vaj for the great links. Take good care and thanks for stopping by!
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And as far as that poster claiming the TMO kicked a guy out of the Fairfield flying hall because he was flying. Not even worth a response 30 years is a long time for someone without perspective. As for the rumour about that flying fellow who was kicked out of the Dome ? It's an obvious lie but that should most definately not stop Rick Archer from perpetuating it since this is your main field of interest.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:33 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Mon, 7/14/08, nablusoss1008 wrote: This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. Yeah, Mytria will demonstrate flying real soon. Nabs, you crack me up. You confuse your thoughts with reality. I'd love to see a TM-sidha fly, but it ain't happenin' unless you've been drinking the koolaid! Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) I don't know that I'd pin it on non-householders. The average Purusha guy is pretty sensible and would be embarrassed by much of what Nabby says.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R.G. Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:55 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit Besides, I have heard of someone who was actually levitating and was asked to leave the dome, because it was too disruptive to others. I doubt that's a true story (that they were levitating). We would have heard a lot more about it if it were.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
I forwarded this to Ruth since she had unsubscribed. From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:44 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. Ruth, you will be missed. As for that certain poster, she is merely doing what she has done on this forum and other forums for years. To put things in perspective for you -- and this is my OPINION -- Judy has this territory thang going on with the forums she participates in. She's like a dog going around peeing on trees to mark her territory. Her...uh...dogging of you and constant attempts to lure you into a head- to-head argument with her weren't necessarily personal, it's just what she DOES to mark her territory. In your case she tried to lure you into head-to- head arguments more than she does some others because 1) you make more sense than she does, 2) people believe what you say, whereas they don't believe what she says, and most important 3) you're a woman. Judy has a history of attempting to drive any strong woman off of any forum she is part of. It started back on a.m.t., and continues to this day. In this respect, she is in my opinion more of a guy than the guys are. It must be her butch side coming out. Anyway, I for one will be sorry to see you go. I understand that you don't believe that I really experienced some of the things I've talked about, and that's just fine in my opinion. I don't really expect anyone to believe them. But I do respect the integrity and the just-the-facts-maam 'tude you brought to Fairfield Life, and will miss it. On reflection, chalk up one more win for Judy Stein. Her tarbaby act -- trying ANYTHING she can think of to lure the people she's threatened by into head-to-head confrontations with her -- has claimed another victim. Who WOULDN'T get tired of some bitch dogging their every step and trying to provoke a fight? I commiserate. Judy Stein has been attempting to lure me into arguments for over 15 years. She follows me from Internet forum to Internet forum doing so. She has done the same with several folks here, as they would be more than willing to tell you. Most of us have found some way to deal with the fact that what WE are dealing with is a form of insanity, to not take it personally, and just keep posting anyway, trying to ignore her attacks and her provocations. But I completely understand the wisdom of the graceful retreat, and just leaving the barking bitch behind. Good luck to you, wherever you go... Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.1/1514 - Release Date: 6/23/2008 7:17 AM
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
Bob, how about, if you show it, they will come. Rather than try to explain in a long winded, tired explanation why it is not important. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? (snip) This is exactly the warning that the sutras warn about: It is not important for anyone to be able to accomplish any particular siddhi. Enlightenment is the goal, not certain 'powers'. Concentrating on powers is not the teaching. The siddhi's are just potentials of a person who is operating at a different level of self aware enlightenment. There are many enlightened people who do not levitate. I am really not sure why Maharishi put so much emphasis on levitation, myself. The goal is enlightenment, not levitation. Besides, I have heard of someone who was actually levitating and was asked to leave the dome, because it was too disruptive to others. Also, Maharishi never wanted to demonstrate the ability to levitate himself, when asked. It is a powerful technique, but I believe requires a certain kind of person to accomplish this for real, and also that the air would have to be rarefied enough, as on the top of a mountain somewhere. You need to remember that Iowa is not on top of a mountain, but is a place of the mundane, and it is ironic in itself, that this large group ended up in the middle of a corn field in Iowa..
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 6:49 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And as far as that poster claiming the TMO kicked a guy out of the Fairfield flying hall because he was flying. Not even worth a response 30 years is a long time for someone without perspective. As for the rumour about that flying fellow who was kicked out of the Dome ? It's an obvious lie but that should most definately not stop Rick Archer from perpetuating it since this is your main field of interest. Actually, I just refuted it in a previous post, before reading this one. In other words, no one was flying in the dome. I live here in FF, have many friends in the domes, and would have heard about it. So no one was kicked out for flying in the dome. And if someone were flying in the dome, that person would be made a TMO celebrity, not kicked out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
Bob, the same guy who brought you the capture the fort analogy also brought you the siddhis, The Natural Law Party, Ayur Ved, Stapatya Ved. He owned it figuratively and literally. I would say in this case the brand extension didn't work. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- (snip) Where is there a *warning* against performing teh siddhis in (Snip) I was thinking that when Maharishi used the 'Capture the Fort' analogy, he was speaking of this. That there are many powers that one could concentrate and forget the goal... Enlightenment. So, in many ways, the siddis techniques which go have the effect you are saying... In many ways, one could be confused, in that 'are we here to levitate, to prove something to somebod... or Are we here to transcend, and become enlightened?
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) I don't know that I'd pin it on non-householders. The average Purusha guy is pretty sensible and would be embarrassed by much of what Nabby says. Yea, but Nabby is a tweener. He's out in the world, but he's got that strong straight and narrow, no deviation vibe. Yes, you're right. Of course it's not a householder-purusha thing. It's just that Nabby gives off such a strong devotee vibe. There is no deviation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's official -- the most mediocre dreams on the planet
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes103@ wrote: snip I lean towards the idea that yogic flying is some sort of brain/body togetherness that lets you tap into hidden energy. I'd buy that as one possible explanation. I don't know *what* the hell it is, but it's not just a case of mass suggestion, people just doing ordinary hopping and thinking it's something else, as Ruth seems to believe. Personally, I think it's more than *just* delusion but only so far as brain and body working together somehow. Big shame DOJ and the boys haven't bothered to check this out as it's world shattering news if it's levitating, even if only a little bit. I wouldn't rule out mass suggestion either, TM is a powerful belief system and everyone knows what flying is supposed to look like we could easily be kidding ourselves. Just try doing it *without* the belief that it's something special and see how far you get. That would be an interesting experiment. It's very hard for me to imagine that if I didn't know what was supposed to happen, I wouldn't find myself hopping, or at least involuntarily jerking and twitching rather strenuously from the surge of energy. Maybe knowing one is supposed to hop gives that energy a sort of coordinated outlet. I think the idea that it's levitation part 1 is unlikely simply because YF has such a distinct set of phases it goes through. First is the mad hopping and sweating and farmyard noises, then you get the hang of it and just leap about assuming you get even that far. Finally it just settles into a rythm and you get the same scene in every flying room, half the people just sitting around and the rest just twitching. If it was going to end up with levitation surely there would be some sort of momentum in everyone getting more lively or at least the ME helping even the non-flyers off the ground? I dunno, I've flown with some really long-timers, and while some of them just sat and/or twitched, others were still hopping like mad. I tend to think the phases are pretty individual. I've never been in a flying room where nobody was hopping (and even if I had been, *I* would have been hopping). snip I don't know if anyone listened to the radio clip about yogic flying I posted earlier but it's interesting for a few reasons: it doesn't mention the ME and it doesn't claim that yogic flying is the first stage of levitation. I think that is the best you can say about it at the moment. I haven't listened to it. What do they say about it, if not that it's the first stage of levitation, or that it generates the ME? They say just what I think, that it's a brain/body synchronisation that makes meditation deeper. I've no doubt they are just being media-savvy and not scaring the locals away from their new development but it's nice to hear they can drop the hyperbole. Unless it's a new improved TMO we are dealing with. Certainly a new improved rap. I heartily approve!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. snip Obama is a better speaker, more intelligent, more universal leader for the United States and the World. I'll give him better speaker. Hillary will do alright; I wouldn't worry about her finances too much. Why would you? Where exactly did I say I was worried about her finances?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip It seems that much of Hillary's campaign debt has to be paid back to her wealthy supporters who ' leant ' funds after they had already maxed out their individual federal campaign contribution limit of $2500 per donor per race. Documentation, please, that her supporters leant [sic] her money. From the very beginning of Hillary's campaign, Hillary relied on big money contributors who quickly maxed out. So did Obama. On March 22, I wrote that when HRC is denied the Dem VP slot, an indignant HRC will team with McCain as his VP. And you're just as ridiculously wrong now as you were then.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I forwarded this to Ruth since she had unsubscribed. I don't suppose you told her, though, that virtually *nothing* in it is true, now, did you? (Ruth, BTW, will know for a fact that *some* of it isn't true. If she's as smart as I think she is, she'll be dubious about the rest as well.) From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:44 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. Ruth, you will be missed. As for that certain poster, she is merely doing what she has done on this forum and other forums for years. To put things in perspective for you -- and this is my OPINION -- Judy has this territory thang going on with the forums she participates in. She's like a dog going around peeing on trees to mark her territory. Her...uh...dogging of you and constant attempts to lure you into a head- to-head argument with her weren't necessarily personal, it's just what she DOES to mark her territory. In your case she tried to lure you into head-to- head arguments more than she does some others because 1) you make more sense than she does, 2) people believe what you say, whereas they don't believe what she says, and most important 3) you're a woman. Judy has a history of attempting to drive any strong woman off of any forum she is part of. It started back on a.m.t., and continues to this day. In this respect, she is in my opinion more of a guy than the guys are. It must be her butch side coming out. Anyway, I for one will be sorry to see you go. I understand that you don't believe that I really experienced some of the things I've talked about, and that's just fine in my opinion. I don't really expect anyone to believe them. But I do respect the integrity and the just-the-facts-maam 'tude you brought to Fairfield Life, and will miss it. On reflection, chalk up one more win for Judy Stein. Her tarbaby act -- trying ANYTHING she can think of to lure the people she's threatened by into head-to-head confrontations with her -- has claimed another victim. Who WOULDN'T get tired of some bitch dogging their every step and trying to provoke a fight? I commiserate. Judy Stein has been attempting to lure me into arguments for over 15 years. She follows me from Internet forum to Internet forum doing so. She has done the same with several folks here, as they would be more than willing to tell you. Most of us have found some way to deal with the fact that what WE are dealing with is a form of insanity, to not take it personally, and just keep posting anyway, trying to ignore her attacks and her provocations. But I completely understand the wisdom of the graceful retreat, and just leaving the barking bitch behind. Good luck to you, wherever you go... Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.1/1514 - Release Date: 6/23/2008 7:17 AM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
On Jul 15, 2008, at 9:58 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I forwarded this to Ruth since she had unsubscribed. I don't suppose you told her, though, that virtually *nothing* in it is true, now, did you? (Ruth, BTW, will know for a fact that *some* of it isn't true. If she's as smart as I think she is, she'll be dubious about the rest as well.) I'm sure she'll hear the ring of truth in it (as many of us did) when we read it Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) Exactly, you are like a football kicked around by circumstances - at least that is how you come across. Yes, you're right. Of course it's not a householder-purusha thing. It's just that Nabby gives off such a strong devotee vibe. There is no deviation. I hope not, seeing what deviation has done to some of the confused guru-shoppers on this forum.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
(Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Barry, you've really outdone yourself with this one. Anybody who's actually followed the traffic here for any length of time will recognize that your OPINION is not only wrong, it knowingly misrepresents the *facts*. Plus which, Ruth knows some facts that you don't. She and I had a number of very cordial email exchanges (she contacted me first, BTW). One of them involved you, as it happens. I'll just say that on that topic, she and I were in complete agreement. Others involved various topics that were being discussed on FFL, in particular the research on TM, for which I was able to give her a number of links. And then there was also just some personal chit-chat. Ruth and I were, in fact--and entirely contrary to your presentation in this post--on excellent terms, both publicly and privately, even if we didn't always agree on every point, up until the discussion we had about abduction experiences, which seemed to throw her for a loop. I have my own ideas as to why that was, which I posted earlier. (Then there was also a very funny exchange between Ruth and me concerning Barry's notion that I found her threatening, which left him in total confusion.) Anyway, on these points Ruth knows I'm telling the truth and you aren't, so I suspect she'll take the rest of what you say--the parts that she has no basis for knowing are lies--with the appropriate caveats. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. Ruth, you will be missed. As for that certain poster, she is merely doing what she has done on this forum and other forums for years. What's so funny about all this is that Barry has ranted a couple of times about how threatened I was by Ruth. But now it appears to be the case that in fact it was Ruth who began to find me threatening. To put things in perspective for you -- and this is my OPINION -- Judy has this territory thang going on with the forums she participates in. She's like a dog going around peeing on trees to mark her territory. Her...uh...dogging of you and constant attempts to lure you into a head- to-head argument with her weren't necessarily personal, it's just what she DOES to mark her territory. To start with, note that in Barry's mind, any comment I make that disagrees with the post it's commenting on constitutes an attempt to lure the poster into an argument. At least in my case; it doesn't with anybody else, as far as Barry's concerned. Certainly not with *him*. In Ruth's case, specifically--and this is the factual misrepresentation--many if not most of my comments to her were *in agreement*. (Of course, it's not impossible that Barry also considers any comment I make *agreeing* with a post to constitute an attempt to lure the poster into an argument as well. I wouldn't put such a notion past him.) In your case she tried to lure you into head-to- head arguments more than she does some others Actually, significantly less than I do with some others. because 1) you make more sense than she does, 2) people believe what you say, whereas they don't believe what she says, Uh, Barry's *OPINION*. and most important 3) you're a woman. Judy has a history of attempting to drive any strong woman off of any forum she is part of. It started back on a.m.t., and continues to this day. Totally factually false, both in general and in Ruth's case. And if you look back, you'll find that more than anyone else on FFL, it's been Barry who has attempted--and frequently succeeded--in driving people off the forum. We recently lost an extremely valuable long-time poster because of Barry's nastiness and dishonesty. But he seems to have a particular penchant for driving off newbies, especially if they appear to be pro-TM. snip I commiserate. Judy Stein has been attempting to lure me into arguments for over 15 years. Too funny. Barry feels secure in telling this lie because Ruth wasn't around long enough to know Barry's game. But readers here are all too aware of it, especially those who used to participate on alt.m.t. She follows me from Internet forum to Internet forum doing so. This is a very old, tired lie Barry's told over and over, but, again, one he feels secure in telling Ruth because she has no way to know it's a lie. The ONLY Internet forum I ever followed Barry to was this one--and that was *at his invitation* to the folks on alt.m.t when he started posting here. Several others there took him up on it as well. This is a fact that Barry
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: Why wouldn't someone with their own real power base be placed as VP on the ticket ? Obama wants his power base to be the only one. Are you inferring that HILLARY will not be placed on the ticket BECAUSE she has her own real power base ? I think it's very unlikely he'd pick her, at least partly for that reason.. If you could determine Hillary's thinking at this time Is she be thinking that she will be given the right of first refusal for the Democratic VP slot ? As far as Hillary's thinking goes, she'll do whatever she thinks is best for the Democratic Party. If she and Obama agreed privately that his publicly giving her first refusal--on condition that she refused--would be good for the party, she'd go along with that gesture. I doubt Obama would go that far, however. He's interested in what's good for Obama. The above is OPINION. Right, I was asked for my opinion, and I gave it. However, I think everyone here knows that if someone had said the same things about Hillary Clinton -- and they could, with considerably greater accuracy -- that Judy would be calling them LIARS for saying it. Barry's hard up for Gotta-Get-Judy bashes. If everyone here knows what Barry says, everyone is in as bad shape mentally as he is. Even in the midst of the primary, when the nastiest imaginable criticisms of Hillary were flying thick and fast, I don't believe I ever called anyone making them a liar, even when their criticisms were based on misinformation. When Judy expresses an OPINION, somehow it comes out as if she is speaking pure Truth, as if she has convinced herself that she knows, and anyone who disagrees with her doesn't. But when someone else expresses an OPINION that Judy doesn't like, they aren't just mistaken, they are LYING. Interesting, doncha think? What's interesting is not just that the above is flatly untrue, somehow it comes out as if Barry is speaking pure Truth, as if he had convinced himself that he knows, and anyone who disagrees with him doesn't. Judy, *my* OPINION is that you project onto the people you don't like the very things you can't face in yourself. But Barry, that's my OPINION of you. I have never encountered a person on this planet who is more interested only in what she thinks is good for herself than you. I've never encountered a person who fears what she perceives as other people's power base than you. You are basically accusing Obama of acting like YOU. And I'm not lying. This is what I actually believe about you. As I've frequently observed, when you say things that are obviously untrue, it's not always easy to tell when you're lying and when you're speaking from serious delusion. Sometimes, I'm afraid, I tend to give you more credit for being in your right mind than is really appropriate.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:50 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Right. Done.
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's official -- the most mediocre dreams on the planet
I did listen to it again and find it to be very well executed. It still is not music that fascinates me but it's probably just the genre. To discuss taste in music is impossible. That was very nice of you to take the time to hear it Nabby. Like a lot of solo artists, I just make the CD that turns me on and then try to find people who share my taste. If you have anything up yourself let me know so I can return the favor and give it a listen. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: If it's OK with you please post the link again and I'll give it a more thorough listening. Thanks Nabby I always appreciate people listening even if they conclude my music is not for them for any reason. I am following my own muse and don't expect to be everybody's cup of tea! Liking my music is not a prerequisite for my liking you. Here is my myspace page where I have posted a few songs from my CDs. http://tinyurl.com/6kunt6 I did listen to Ry's CD and can appreciate his musical diversity which is much broader than my own. I loved his work with Malian artist Ali Farke Toure the most. You can hear bits of it here: http://tinyurl.com/699cvf I gravitate towards simple roots music. I did listen to it again and find it to be very well executed. It still is not music that fascinates me but it's probably just the genre. To discuss taste in music is impossible.
[FairfieldLife] Reminder for Fairfielders
The Iowans for Voting Integrity introductory meeting for those interested is today Tuesday at 12:30 PM upstairs at Revelations. Hope to see you there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Barry, you've really outdone yourself with this one. Anybody who's actually followed the traffic here for any length of time will recognize that your OPINION is not only wrong, it knowingly misrepresents the *facts*. I suspect that more people on this forum agree with my opinion of you, your actions, and your motives than agree with your own opinion of those things. I see no reason to argue any of them with you. You've stated your opinion, I've stated mine. End of story. Need I point out that any attempt on your part to continue this and to try lure me into a head- to-head argument with you supports *my* previously- expressed opinion of you and your tactics, and rebuts your own? Then again, you just rebutted my opinion that you consistently tried to start arguments with Ruth by throwing in a few zingers against Ruth, trying again to start *another* argument with her via email, so how sane can you be, eh? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Plus which, Ruth knows some facts that you don't. She and I had a number of very cordial email exchanges (she contacted me first, BTW). One of them involved you, as it happens. I'll just say that on that topic, she and I were in complete agreement. Others involved various topics that were being discussed on FFL, in particular the research on TM, for which I was able to give her a number of links. And then there was also just some personal chit-chat. Ruth and I were, in fact--and entirely contrary to your presentation in this post--on excellent terms, both publicly and privately, even if we didn't always agree on every point, up until the discussion we had about abduction experiences, which seemed to throw her for a loop. I have my own ideas as to why that was, which I posted earlier. Zat so Judy? Ruth and I also have a cordial e-mail relationship. What you are describing does not jive with my conversations with her. You say all of this now that she's gone and cannot refute any of it of course. This is Ruth from an e-mail: I have been posting fairly regularly on FFL to try to get a feeling of the point of view of a wide variety of people, all of whom hold strong viewpoints. I have had very mixed feelings about it because I truly do not like the personal attacks that happen with regularity. But then people like Curtis entice me to post more. But I found myself saying f**k you too to Judy and I knew I could never engage her again. She is mean and clearly can hold a grudge for years. Is she a liar too Judy?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:50 AM, authfriend wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Wow, Barry really nailed the stalking thing, huh? Would you like her home address?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
On Jul 15, 2008, at 11:39 AM, geezerfreak wrote: Zat so Judy? Ruth and I also have a cordial e-mail relationship. What you are describing does not jive with my conversations with her. You say all of this now that she's gone and cannot refute any of it of course. I had the same impression as you in off list emails with Ruthie.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Plus which, Ruth knows some facts that you don't. She and I had a number of very cordial email exchanges (she contacted me first, BTW). One of them involved you, as it happens. I'll just say that on that topic, she and I were in complete agreement. Others involved various topics that were being discussed on FFL, in particular the research on TM, for which I was able to give her a number of links. And then there was also just some personal chit-chat. Ruth and I were, in fact--and entirely contrary to your presentation in this post--on excellent terms, both publicly and privately, even if we didn't always agree on every point, up until the discussion we had about abduction experiences, which seemed to throw her for a loop. I have my own ideas as to why that was, which I posted earlier. Zat so Judy? Ruth and I also have a cordial e-mail relationship. What you are describing does not jive with my conversations with her. You say all of this now that she's gone and cannot refute any of it of course. She couldn't even if she wanted to, because it's true. This is Ruth from an e-mail: I have been posting fairly regularly on FFL to try to get a feeling of the point of view of a wide variety of people, all of whom hold strong viewpoints. I have had very mixed feelings about it because I truly do not like the personal attacks that happen with regularity. But then people like Curtis entice me to post more. But I found myself saying f**k you too to Judy and I knew I could never engage her again. She is mean and clearly can hold a grudge for years. Is she a liar too Judy? None of what you quote contradicts what I wrote. I said explicitly (see above) that the previous cordiality of our relationship changed with the discussion about abduction experiences, to which she reacted badly. Right in the middle of that discussion, she also got upset because several of us had pointed out that John Knapp didn't have TM's best interests at heart. That's what she's referring to about holding a grudge for years (except that she apparently wasn't aware that Knapp *is still at it* with his TMFree blog and his family therapy page). I had *never* personally attacked her until after she personally attacked *me* in the abduction experiences thread, and then subsequently at considerable length (and with precious little integrity) when she returned after her suspension for overposting. What you quote from her email, in other words, was all from *after* that reversal on her part, which, again, I described explicitly in the post of mine quoted above. I gather she's given you permission to quote from her emails so you can attempt to make readers think I'm lying. I doubt she would give me permission to quote her emails to me prior to our falling-out to document my own assertions.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:50 AM, authfriend wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Wow, Barry really nailed the stalking thing, huh? Would you like her home address? What I liked was how she managed to include one last insult, designed to taunt Ruth into replying to it, and thus continue the arguments that Judy lives for: What's so funny about all this is that Barry has ranted a couple of times about how threatened I was by Ruth. But now it appears to be the case that in fact it was Ruth who began to find me threatening. In addition to the other traits I mentioned earlier, I think Judy has abandonment issues. NOTHING seems to piss her off more than someone writing her off as a bad bet and walking away. And she reacts the same way every time it happens, by throwing out a few last zingers and hoping that the person will take the bait and come back and interact with her again. Angela fell for it, but I suspect that Ruth is too smart to. Wouldn't it be fascinating to hear about the types of real-life relationships Judy has had over the years? My bet is that none of her ex's have maintained any contact with her whatsoever, for exactly this reason. If they even sent a birthday card, Judy would find some way to try to turn it into an argument, and suck them back into same old same old.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Barry, you've really outdone yourself with this one. Anybody who's actually followed the traffic here for any length of time will recognize that your OPINION is not only wrong, it knowingly misrepresents the *facts*. I suspect that more people on this forum agree with my opinion of you, your actions, and your motives than agree with your own opinion of those things. I see no reason to argue any of them with you. You have no *basis* to argue any of them with me, especially the opinions that are based on knowing misstatement of the facts, i.e., lies. You've stated your opinion, I've stated mine. And you've told a whole bunch of lies, too. End of story. Need I point out that any attempt on your part to continue this and to try lure me into a head- to-head argument with you supports *my* previously- expressed opinion of you and your tactics, and rebuts your own? I take you at your word that your present post is the end of the story on your part. I'm just correcting the record. Then again, you just rebutted my opinion that you consistently tried to start arguments with Ruth by throwing in a few zingers against Ruth, Only one zinger, actually, that having to do with her quitting FFL because she couldn't stand it that I continued to comment on her posts. And even if that were an attempt to start an argument with her, which it's not, it would hardly constitute my consistently trying to start arguments with her. trying again to start *another* argument with her via email, so how sane can you be, eh? :-) Ruth's been explicit that she's not going to have any more contact with me. I think she's telling the truth; apparently you don't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Jul 15, 2008, at 10:50 AM, authfriend wrote: (Rick, since you were so thoughtful as to forward Barry's post to Ruth, I'm sure you'll be happy to forward my response as well. Right?) Wow, Barry really nailed the stalking thing, huh? Would you like her home address? What I liked was how she managed to include one last insult, designed to taunt Ruth into replying to it, and thus continue the arguments that Judy lives for: As I pointed out in my previous post, Ruth obviously has no intention of having anything more to do with me. I take her at her word. Don't you? (Actually that insult was more for the purpose of making fun of Barry's nitwit notion that I found Ruth threatening. But on the face of it, it's Ruth who left, not me.) What's so funny about all this is that Barry has ranted a couple of times about how threatened I was by Ruth. But now it appears to be the case that in fact it was Ruth who began to find me threatening. In addition to the other traits I mentioned earlier, I think Judy has abandonment issues. NOTHING seems to piss her off more than someone writing her off as a bad bet and walking away. And she reacts the same way every time it happens, by throwing out a few last zingers and hoping that the person will take the bait and come back and interact with her again. Angela fell for it, but I suspect that Ruth is too smart to. Note, by the way, that in Barry's immediately previous post attacking me, he declared that it was end of story. For the next two minutes, that was. But I agree, Ruth *is* too smart to come back. A lot smarter than Barry, in other words. Barry's problem here is that he can't stand it when I don't let him have the last word but reply to his end of story posts by refuting the lies therein. Folks have a *choice* of whether they to return after stalking off in high dudgeon, Barry. I'm not obliged to let them have the last word if their last word isn't accurate. Wouldn't it be fascinating to hear about the types of real-life relationships Judy has had over the years? My bet is that none of her ex's have maintained any contact with her whatsoever, for exactly this reason. If they even sent a birthday card, Judy would find some way to try to turn it into an argument, and suck them back into same old same old. I can't think of a single speculation Barry's indulged in about my private life that has been anywhere near accurate, and the above is no exception.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) I don't know that I'd pin it on non-householders. The average Purusha guy is pretty sensible and would be embarrassed by much of what Nabby says. Yea, but Nabby is a tweener. He's out in the world, but he's got that strong straight and narrow, no deviation vibe. Yes, you're right. Of course it's not a householder-purusha thing. It's just that Nabby gives off such a strong devotee vibe. There is no deviation. Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. A special thanks to Curtis who is both funny and perceptive, to Jim/Sandiego for answering every question I ever asked, Levitation is developed through roughly 3 steps. Ruth; 10 yard hops is not levitation, it's just the second phase; jumping like frogs. Third is when the real fun starts; staying in the air, moving at will ! :-) This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. And yes, I also miss Jim. According to Bhoja's commentary the stages are, *if* I'm not mistaken (have not seen a translation, so these are based solely on my own take of the original Sanskrit): - walking on water - walking on a spider's web (uurNa-naabha[1]-tantu-jaalena) - ?walking on the rays of the Sun (aaditya-rashmibhiH) - going through the air as one wishes (yatheSTam aakaashena) [1] wool-navel(ed)? = spider FWIW, the whole comment seems to go like this: kaayaH paañca-bhautikaM shariiraM tasyaakaashenaavaakaasha- daayakena yaH saMbandhas tatra saMyamaM vidhaaya laghuni tuulaaudau samaapattiM tanmayiilakSaNaaM ca vidhaaya praaptaatilaghu-bhaavo yogii prathamaM yathaaruci jale saMcaran krameNorNa-naabha-tantu-jaalena saMcaramaaNa aaditya-rashmibhish ca viharan yatheSTam aakaashena gacchati. (pada-paaTha = word-reading, i.e, without sandhi: kaayaH paañca-bhautikam; shariiram; tasya+aakaashena+avakaasha- daayakena yaH saMbandhas tatra saMyamam; vidhaaya laghuni tuulaaudau samaapattim; tan-mayii-lakSaNaaM ca vidhaaya praapta+atilaghu-bhaavaH; yogii prathamam; yathaa-ruci jale saMcaran krameNa+uurNa-naabha-tantu-jaalena saMcaramaaNaH; aaditya-rashmibhiH; ca viharan yathaa+iSTam aakaashena gacchati.) One interesting detail above is that 'jale' (on? water) is the *locative* singular form from 'jalam' (water), but 'jaalena' is the *instrumental* singular from 'jaalam (cob-web), so perhaps it should rather be translated to 'with the help of...', or something like that. Same with 'aaditya-rashmibhiH' which is the *instrumental plural* from 'rashmi' (ray).
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wayback71 Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 11:48 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. Could be, in which case he's a brilliant spoofer, but I think he's for real.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do. So you think he might be fooling us about Lord Maytreya preparing to open a can of enlightened whup-ass on us all? Or that he flew further than people can broad jump? I'm with Rick on this. Nabby believes his own rap and that is what makes him so entertaining here. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do. I think he is the classic example of the TM cultist. He attempts to parrot TM Speak in almost every response he gives on this forum. I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot. kaf, kaf, kaf...ka.. ???
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. I'd like to defend Nabby on this point. Most everyone here would be shunned by true believers in the movement for our beliefs. Just Nabby's beliefs about Benjamin Creme would be enough to make him an outcast. One thing I know for sure, if the movement shuns you, the better chance I am going to have something in common with you. I take the taste of the movement as an inverse measure of how interesting a person is likely to be. Nabby is a valued part of the misfit bus here IMO. He represents a POV that no TB would dare to share with the likes of this pirate ship! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do. I think he is the classic example of the TM cultist. He attempts to parrot TM Speak in almost every response he gives on this forum. I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here a lot. IOW, birds of a feather.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama Will Win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, satvadude108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip Of course, the real danger to his candidacy doesn't come from John McCain and the Republicans but from his own party. The Denver convention is gearing up to be a confrontation that will make Chicago in '68 look like a Ghandi rally... Hillary wants a roll call, her supporters want a roll call, and there's a movement afoot to get pledged Obama delegates to switch their votes...and it's really growing... I have been wondering when this would achieve the critical mass necessary to get attention in the press. Been getting it for a while, actually. Oh really? And how is a while defined? The ActBlue site indicates donations of $380.92. ActBlue isn't the only contribution channel. The Denver Group collected enough to run a good-sized ad in the Chicago Tribune on July 11. Oh, Ok. a while must be defined as 3 days ago. http://thedenvergroup.blogspot.com/ Do you think Hillary will openly support this movement? Not a chance. (Well, there's a chance, I suppose, but Obama would have to be making an even bigger fool of himself and his supporters than he has so far.) Which is it? Not a chance. Well, there's a chance If I didn't know better, I'd think you hadn't made up your mind. We both know that what you are doing is trying to engage one of your twisting nasty never ending exchanges. You may consider them intellectual tennis but I see them as the product of your very unpleasant personality. Hard to believe that passions on the streets of Denver could ever match Chicago in '68. The floor of the convention could be another story. Neither is likely. Shemp is exaggerating. Seeing how bigga fools Hillary's true believers will make of themselves will definitely raise the entertainment value. Those who have actually been following things know that many if not most of those involved in this movement are not so much Hillary True Believers as Obama Nonbelievers. I suppose that as seen thru your Obama hating bitter spectacles it does look that way. Shemp's right about one thing, though. The number of ONBs is growing rapidly, and it's showing up in the polls, in his and McCain's approval ratings, and most noticeably in Obama's fundraising, which has slumped badly. As if those are not part of the natural cycle of electioneering in Primary and General election cycles. Take a seat or join the fray as Hillary True Believers make complete asses of themselves.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
shempmcgurk wrote: I think he is the classic example of the TM cultist. He attempts to parrot TM Speak in almost every response he gives on this forum. I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot. We had a few of those around the center where I was in the 1970s. I first got introduced to them when I became a checker before my TTC. The teachers would palm the kooks off on me to check because they didn't want to deal with them. They were also known to run when they saw one coming or *try* to be polite if they had to speak with them. These people were often mentally vata and would talk your ear off and bore you to death.
[FairfieldLife] Your guess?
Do we find the Higgs boson with the help of LHC, or do we not?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Your guess?
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of cardemaister Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:47 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Your guess? Do we find the Higgs boson with the help of LHC, or do we not? I say we do, and if that doesn't work, try LSD or PHP.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. I'd like to defend Nabby on this point. Most everyone here would be shunned by true believers in the movement for our beliefs. And rightly so. We have cosmic cooties. Just Nabby's beliefs about Benjamin Creme would be enough to make him an outcast. One thing I know for sure, if the movement shuns you, the better chance I am going to have something in common with you. I take the taste of the movement as an inverse measure of how interesting a person is likely to be. Well said. That's pretty much it. Nabby is a valued part of the misfit bus here IMO. He represents a POV that no TB would dare to share with the likes of this pirate ship! I couldn't agree more. I enjoy his point of view, even when I think it's absurd. And we don't get to hear it very often here. It is a poignant reminder of why we are outcasts from the TMO, too, and why that is a Good Thing. Since people have been weighing in on whether he's for real or not, I have to agree with Curtis. He's very much for real. In a not-in-touch-with-reality kinda way, that is. If you ignore the Creme and the Space Brothers stuff, he's pretty much yer classic TM TB. Besides, I've lifted almost as many lines of dialog from his posts to use in a story I'm writing about cults as I have from Judy. When he goes off on a tear, like the last few days, I feel like Quentin Tarantino the night he got tossed into jail and spent the entire night writing down the things that were being said by the other people in the cell with him. All of that dialog later appeared in Pulp Fiction. Nabby and Judy are my *research assistants*. Don't anyone drive them away. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Your guess?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Behalf Of cardemaister Do we find the Higgs boson with the help of LHC, or do we not? I say we do, and if that doesn't work, try LSD or PHP. There are all *kinds* of bosons participating in FFL. At least one or two of them ought to be Higgs bosons. Why don't we just ask them?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: snip I'm back! And you are welcome back, partly because even though you almost certainly went over the posting limit last week by accident, you took your timeout quietly, without fuss, and with class. Compare and contrast to some who, in the class department, have shown...uh...not so much. ROTFL! I've never made a fuss about a timeout. I was never *given* a timeout to make a fuss about. Barry has also claimed that I refused to take a timeout, even though (a) I've never been given one, and (b) there's no refusal option for timeouts. Barry lives a life of solipsistic fantasy because reality doesn't work quite the way he thinks it should. And, oh, if you want to see class, check out a few of Barry's posts ranting about my posting habits, based on the obsessive count he keeps of the number of my posts. Sick, and getting sicker by the day. Gee, Judy...I was talking about Shemp and Nabby and sparaig, all of whom have thrown tantrums over being tossed off for a week or more. Did you somehow think I was talking about you? Must be a guilty conscience. And the lack of class thing, of course... :-) But now that you bring it up (I didn't) You *have* gone over the posting limit more than anyone here. That is documented, both before the enforced timeouts, and afterwards. And you have even *admitted* that you went over, and yet never once did you *voluntarily* take your well-deserved timeout. I'd say that speaks to a certain lack of class, wouldn't you? I disagree TurquoiseB. She exemplifies *Third* class.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Thanks to almost all of you for being here to teach me bunches! Anyone think that a 10 yard hop claim isn't a levitation claim? Oh well. I can't seem to stay here on the terms I had set for myself, with no interaction with a certain poster, so I am outtahere. A special thanks to Curtis who is both funny and perceptive, to Jim/Sandiego for answering every question I ever asked, Levitation is developed through roughly 3 steps. Ruth; 10 yard hops is not levitation, it's just the second phase; jumping like frogs. Third is when the real fun starts; staying in the air, moving at will ! :-) This has already started happening and will soon be seen by the general public. And yes, I also miss Jim. According to Bhoja's commentary the stages are, *if* I'm not mistaken (have not seen a translation, so these are based solely on my own take of the original Sanskrit): - walking on water - walking on a spider's web (uurNa-naabha[1]-tantu-jaalena) - ?walking on the rays of the Sun (aaditya-rashmibhiH) - going through the air as one wishes (yatheSTam aakaashena) [1] wool-navel(ed)? = spider There's a modern (14th century?) Upanishad that talks about hopping like a frog, etc. I believe it was in terms of pranayama, but the fourth pranayama to me, appears to be samadhi, so thats not necesarily a contradiction with MMY's interpretation of things. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Remember, he isn't the nominee until the convention nominates him officially. He didn't win enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination; he'll need superdelegates to make up the difference, and they get to change their minds at any time up to the convention. This is true. This also clarifies your desires regarding the convention. Best yas not hold yer breath.
[FairfieldLife] Vedic Economics (Sort of)
I recently mentioned Dr. Ravi Batra's writings on the subject of the social cycles involved in economic and their relationship to the Indian caste system. At one time much of the section on the subject was posted on Internet by Batra himself which are based on the writing of an Indian pundits possibly several centuries old. It was a fascinating subject when I first read it in Batra's book The Great Depression of 1990. It has been updated a bit for his new book The New Golden Age but I found an excerpt and explanation of the concept on this blog: http://www.bullnotbull.com/archive/batra-1.html The characteristics of the aquisitor's age we are going though now as the author of the blog points out do very much resemble what we are seeing now. Perhaps I can locate the references to the pundit somewhere. I probably still have Batra's book in one of the boxes somewhere out in the garage. This is Batra's site: http://www.ravibatra.com/ He is a frequent guest on Thom Hartmann's Air America Radio show.
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's official -- the most mediocre dreams on the planet
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Or, more likely, that they're the first stage of a sequence of developments that ends with levitation. Unless you've experienced Yogic Flying, it's probably not a great idea to make suggestions about what's really happening. Judy as always; this penetrating intellect so badly needed in this wanting world. You should duplicate yourself ! It is heartwarming when Nabby finds a soulmate. Truly touching.
[FairfieldLife] A Smarter Way to Fight Newsweek (Columbia's Invincible Defense System isworking)]
A new, more coherent thinking in military tactics. But what happened afterward-which hasn't been widely reported-was almost as remarkable, according to http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=Juan+Carlos+Pinzon Colombian Vice Defense Minister Juan Carlos Pinzón. The Colombian Army cornered the hostages' captors, the FARC's notorious 1st Front-the latest success stemming from Bogotá's tactic of dropping its special forces into the jungle and keeping the weakened guerrillas on the run. But we took the decision not to attack, Pinzón told NEWSWEEK, because the government wanted to convey it had a new strategic concept. We want to send a message to the FARC and to the world: not to exterminate the FARC but to welcome back anyone who wants to come into the system. MILITARY A Smarter Way to Fight He was the brains behind 'Charlie Wilson's War.' Now his tactics are hot, from Pakistan to Colombia. See article at: http://www.newsweek.com/id/145874?from=rss
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama Will Win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, satvadude108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip Of course, the real danger to his candidacy doesn't come from John McCain and the Republicans but from his own party. The Denver convention is gearing up to be a confrontation that will make Chicago in '68 look like a Ghandi rally... Hillary wants a roll call, her supporters want a roll call, and there's a movement afoot to get pledged Obama delegates to switch their votes...and it's really growing... I have been wondering when this would achieve the critical mass necessary to get attention in the press. Been getting it for a while, actually. Oh really? And how is a while defined? Well, if you're talking about organized opposition to Obama's nomination and the DNC, since shortly after Hillary endorsed him, actually. Fox News, for example, had PUMA members on Neil Cavuto's show on June 9. WaPo had a story on the anti-Obama movement on June 27. There've been many stories about the protests being planned in Denver. The Denver Group itself was founded on June 18 and started accepting contributions on June 24. The ActBlue site indicates donations of $380.92. ActBlue isn't the only contribution channel. The Denver Group collected enough to run a good-sized ad in the Chicago Tribune on July 11. Oh, Ok. a while must be defined as 3 days ago. For The Denver Group specifically, yes. http://thedenvergroup.blogspot.com/ Do you think Hillary will openly support this movement? Not a chance. (Well, there's a chance, I suppose, but Obama would have to be making an even bigger fool of himself and his supporters than he has so far.) Which is it? Not a chance. Well, there's a chance Another way of putting it: She won't support it *unless* Obama makes an even bigger fool of himself and his supporters than he has so far. If I didn't know better, I'd think you hadn't made up your mind. We both know that what you are doing is trying to engage one of your twisting nasty never ending exchanges. We do?? Hey, you're the one who responded. You may consider them intellectual tennis but I see them as the product of your very unpleasant personality. One can't both have an unpleasant personality and engage in intellectual tennis? snip Those who have actually been following things know that many if not most of those involved in this movement are not so much Hillary True Believers as Obama Nonbelievers. I suppose that as seen thru your Obama hating bitter spectacles it does look that way. Let's see if I understand how this works. We're actually Hillary True Believers, but because we see things through our Obama-hating spectacles, we think we're, uh, really Obama-haters. Have I got that right? Shemp's right about one thing, though. The number of ONBs is growing rapidly, and it's showing up in the polls, in his and McCain's approval ratings, and most noticeably in Obama's fundraising, which has slumped badly. As if those are not part of the natural cycle of electioneering in Primary and General election cycles. Given the overall anti-Republican political climate this election year, Obama should be pulling away from McCain at light speed at this point, but instead he's falling back. And it was his own campaign that predicted $100 million in donations in June. It's turned out to be only $30 million or so. Take a seat or join the fray as Hillary True Believers make complete asses of themselves.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Remember, he isn't the nominee until the convention nominates him officially. He didn't win enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination; he'll need superdelegates to make up the difference, and they get to change their minds at any time up to the convention. This is true. This also clarifies your desires regarding the convention. You betchum. Call it the Impossible Dream. (What did I say previously that needed clarification?) Best yas not hold yer breath. Uh, wasn't planning to, but thanks for the warning.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. You have posted this false argument before with no support, simply calling it traditional. That simply isn't true, as Sunshine Sal pointed out to you. There have been instances where candidates who were on good terms helped a failed campaign retire a small debt. i.e. 10k To help retire a debt that was recklessly and imprudently driven to, say, 22 million dollars is foolish. snip Obama is a better speaker, more intelligent, more universal leader for the United States and the World. I'll give him better speaker. Hillary will do alright; I wouldn't worry about her finances too much. Why would you? Where exactly did I say I was worried about her finances?
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) I don't know that I'd pin it on non-householders. The average Purusha guy is pretty sensible and would be embarrassed by much of what Nabby says. Yea, but Nabby is a tweener. He's out in the world, but he's got that strong straight and narrow, no deviation vibe. Yes, you're right. Of course it's not a householder-purusha thing. It's just that Nabby gives off such a strong devotee vibe. There is no deviation. Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, And what would these outrageous statements be ? What I post is simply what I know to be truthful. That some here gets annoyed is just their guilt and stress because they know that they have been wasting their lives after quitting TM.
[FairfieldLife] Quinnipiac: Obama Opens Lead Nationally
With commanding leads among women and young voters and near unanimous support from black voters, Sen. Barack Obama has a 50% to 41% lead over Sen. John McCain, according to a new Quinnipiac poll of likely voters released today. Independent voters split 44% to 44%. McCain has a slight 47% to 44% edge among men voters and a larger 49% to 42% lead among white voters. But black voters back Obama 94% to 1%, while women support him 55% to 36%. Interesting: Obama gets 44% to McCain's 47% in red states, which went Republican by more than 5 percent in 2004, and leads 50% to 39% in purple or swing states. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1192What=strArea=;strTime=0
[FairfieldLife] Amaranda Bhairavan (Nandu) Returns to Fairfield in August
It is our great joy to announce that Amarananda Bhairavan (affectionately known as Nandu) will be returning to Fairfield between August 7th and the 10th. He will be offering a variety of powerful programs, all of which are outlined below. []http://www.mystictantra.com/images/yantras/yantra7.jpg Individual Rice Readings Divination of Energy Body Ritual Rectification Thursday, August 7th 9 am - 6 pm Friday, August 8th 1:30 - 4:30 pm Saturday, August 9th 2 - 7 pm Sunday, August 10th 8 am - 12 noon At private residence (location to be given upon receipt of registration) Cost: $108 Rice readings are done on a one-on-one basis. During each reading, Bhairavan uses a method of divination called Oti Nottam, developed by the odiyyas to see each person's astral body, karmic sheath (with its marma-chakra systems), mystic shield and all layers of mental realms. During this process Nandu invokes and becomes a vessel to his cluster of high energy beings that guide the session. As in Jyotish astrology, Nandu will share what he sees from the rice about a person's past, present and future tendencies. Blemishes, prana flow impairments and other harmful abnormalities are then detected and rituals will be done and remedies offered to repair them. Questions can also be asked. []http://chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/slogams/images/18narasimh a2.jpg Deep Cleansing Ritual A Modern Resurrection of the Healing and Wellness System of the Paleolithic Peoples of South India Friday, August 8th9:30 am - 12 noon At private residence (location to be given upon receipt of registration) Cost: $108 This ritual, done in a group of no more than 16 participants, facilitates the cleansing of energetic blemishes in a person's mystic shield. Participants are placed in a circle around a geometric pattern of ancient symbolism. Amarananda Bhairavan then energetically links everyone so all can assist with the deep cleansing in a safe way. After preliminary rites to empower each participant in this ritual of mutual help, Bhairavan will then open himself to his cluster of high energy beings. These transcendent beings will direct him to facilitate specific deep cleansing of each participant's energetic sheaths. At the same time Bhairavan will hold the mystic circle together by orchestrating specific chants by the group. This Cleansing Ritual initiates the clearing of deep-seated energetic patterns, causing them to unravel. The process releases life force trapped in compacted thought kernels. Released life force is then available to the person for his or her use. By wisely reinvesting life force in healthier patterns participants will experience concrete results in daily life. http://www.maheronline.org/religion/navratri.asp http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.maheronline.org/religion /images/goddess-Lakshmi.jpgimgrefurl=http://www.maheronline.org/religio n/navratri.asph=813w=600sz=111tbnid=qJBVQ-qM7ecJ::tbnh=144tbnw=106 prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlakshmisa=Xoi=image_resultresnum=1ct=imagecd=1 http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.maheronline.org/religion /images/goddess-Lakshmi.jpgimgrefurl=http://www.maheronline.org/religio n/navratri.asph=813w=600sz=111tbnid=qJBVQ-qM7ecJ::tbnh=144tbnw=106 prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlakshmisa=Xoi=image_resultresnum=1ct=imagecd=1 Lakshmi Puja A Ritual for Abundance Friday, August 8th 7:30 to 9:00 pm At private residence (location to be given upon receipt of registration) Cost: $10 Please join us for this extraordinary opportunity to participate in a traditional worship to Lakshmi, goddess of prosperity, healing, wellness and abundance facilitated by Amarananda Bhairavan (Nandu). You may bring your own murthis, deities, and yantras for this collective Puja experience. Participation in this Puja will awaken the sleeping Shakti within and enliven each participants intentions for Abundance, and Creativity, and a Joyous life. http://www.samhainmoon.com/labels/Lakshmi.htmlhttp://tbn0.google.com/im ages?q=tbn:EDeIF-7ftmMJ::www.samhainmoon.com/uploaded_images/lakshmi-769 689.jpg Chants for Abundance A Four-hour Workshop Saturday, August 9th 9:30 am - 1:30 pm At private residence (location to be given upon receipt of registration) Workshop fee: $108 Spend an extraordinary day with Amarananda Bhairavan, internationally renowned Vedic priest, master healer, and author of visionary books, Kali's Odiyya - A Shaman's True Story of Initiation, and Medicine of Light - A Shaman's Journey through Mystic Space-Time. At this seminar you will learn powerful, ancient techniques for wellness and abundance from the goddess-centered matrifocal cultures of pre-Vedic India. This workshop focuses on teaching a specific sequence of a magical ritual to Lakshmi, Goddess of wealth and
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do. I think he is the classic example of the TM cultist. He attempts to parrot TM Speak in almost every response he gives on this forum. I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot. These cowardly lies are absurd. I have not left the Movement though I do not teach as I'm not rectified, and have my own career. Nor have I had any mental problems, ever. I have contact with movement-people on a monthly basis and have a standing invitation to re-join Purusha if I wish. In other words; cheap lies. I doubdt your anonymus informant knows who I am. Guessing perhaps, but knowing; certainly not. I might know who your informant is, and her reasons for being incognito could be many indeed.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
On Jul 15, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Tom wrote: It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. You have posted this false argument before with no support, simply calling it traditional. That simply isn't true, as Sunshine Sal pointed out to you. There have been instances where candidates who were on good terms helped a failed campaign retire a small debt. i.e. 10k To help retire a debt that was recklessly and imprudently driven to, say, 22 million dollars is foolish. It's not traditional at all, it happens, but it's the exception rather than the rule, was the clear message from the articles. All the examples Judy linked to previously also came with big caveats. The one I remember best was Tom Vilsack, who pulled out early and had a debt I think of something like $100,000 or less--big diff from 22 million! And they were also on the best of terms, Vilsack then becoming campaign chairman for Hillary in Iowa, a state she seemed destined to breeze through at that point, giving her every reason in the world to reward him as it seemed that he was doing a heck of a job. Well, we all know how *that* turned out. :) Would have loved to hear the conversation between them the morning after she lost so badly she came in third. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amaranda Bhairavan (Nandu) Returns to Fairfield in August
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rice readings are done on a one-on-one basis. During each reading, Bhairavan uses a method of divination called Oti Nottam, developed by the odiyyas to see each person's astral body, karmic sheath (with its marma-chakra systems), mystic shield and all layers of mental realms. During this process Nandu invokes and becomes a vessel to his cluster of high energy beings that guide the session. As in Jyotish astrology, Nandu will share what he sees from the rice about a person's past, present and future tendencies. Blemishes, prana flow impairments and other harmful abnormalities are then detected and rituals will be done and remedies offered to repair them. Questions can also be asked. I think my only question is whether he needs to use brown rice to do a reading for people of color.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. I'd like to defend Nabby on this point. Most everyone here would be shunned by true believers in the movement for our beliefs. Just Nabby's beliefs about Benjamin Creme would be enough to make him an outcast. One thing I know for sure, if the movement shuns you, the better chance I am going to have something in common with you. I take the taste of the movement as an inverse measure of how interesting a person is likely to be. Nabby is a valued part of the misfit bus here IMO. He represents a POV that no TB would dare to share with the likes of this pirate ship! I agree with you totally on this Curtis - he is valued. And if he does actually believe what he writes, and I can see that he might, then more power to him if it creates a meaningful, coherent and spiritual world view for him. We all do that, one way or the other. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: snip Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, and then sitting back and watching everyone reply? Most TB's I know are not like Nabby. And they would not engage on FFL. My guess: He's a moderate TB but does like to stir things up from time to time by making outrageous claims. I think he frequently has his tongue firmly in his cheek and enjoys watching the TM critics fulminate. He clearly doesn't take himself as seriously as they do. I think he is the classic example of the TM cultist. He attempts to parrot TM Speak in almost every response he gives on this forum. I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. That would explain why he hangs out here alot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama Will Win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom azgrey@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, satvadude108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip Of course, the real danger to his candidacy doesn't come from John McCain and the Republicans but from his own party. The Denver convention is gearing up to be a confrontation that will make Chicago in '68 look like a Ghandi rally... Hillary wants a roll call, her supporters want a roll call, and there's a movement afoot to get pledged Obama delegates to switch their votes...and it's really growing... I have been wondering when this would achieve the critical mass necessary to get attention in the press. Been getting it for a while, actually. Oh really? And how is a while defined? Well, if you're talking about organized opposition to Obama's nomination and the DNC, since shortly after Hillary endorsed him, actually. Fox News, for example, had PUMA members on Neil Cavuto's show on June 9. WaPo had a story on the anti-Obama movement on June 27. There've been many stories about the protests being planned in Denver. The Denver Group itself was founded on June 18 and started accepting contributions on June 24. that Thank you. I knew you would be able to provide great detail on the matter. Is it true that PUMA is a Republican founded and funded group? Seems kinda Nixonian. I wonder how much dough Sean Hannity has donated? Interesting that Hillary supporters line up with them instead of working on getting a Democrat elected. If there are really 18 million PUMAs, why don't they each donate a dollar to retiring Hillary's debt? The ActBlue site indicates donations of $380.92. ActBlue isn't the only contribution channel. The Denver Group collected enough to run a good-sized ad in the Chicago Tribune on July 11. Oh, Ok. a while must be defined as 3 days ago. For The Denver Group specifically, yes. http://thedenvergroup.blogspot.com/ Do you think Hillary will openly support this movement? Not a chance. (Well, there's a chance, I suppose, but Obama would have to be making an even bigger fool of himself and his supporters than he has so far.) Which is it? Not a chance. Well, there's a chance Another way of putting it: She won't support it *unless* Obama makes an even bigger fool of himself and his supporters than he has so far. If I didn't know better, I'd think you hadn't made up your mind. We both know that what you are doing is trying to engage one of your twisting nasty never ending exchanges. We do?? Hey, you're the one who responded. You may consider them intellectual tennis but I see them as the product of your very unpleasant personality. One can't both have an unpleasant personality and engage in intellectual tennis? Clearly one can. snip Those who have actually been following things know that many if not most of those involved in this movement are not so much Hillary True Believers as Obama Nonbelievers. I suppose that as seen thru your Obama hating bitter spectacles it does look that way. Let's see if I understand how this works. We're actually Hillary True Believers, but because we see things through our Obama-hating spectacles, we think we're, uh, really Obama-haters. Have I got that right? Shemp's right about one thing, though. The number of ONBs is growing rapidly, and it's showing up in the polls, in his and McCain's approval ratings, and most noticeably in Obama's fundraising, which has slumped badly. As if those are not part of the natural cycle of electioneering in Primary and General election cycles. Given the overall anti-Republican political climate this election year, Obama should be pulling away from McCain at light speed at this point, but instead he's falling back. And it was his own campaign that predicted $100 million in donations in June. It's turned out to be only $30 million or so. Take a seat or join the fray as Hillary True Believers make complete asses of themselves.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Honestly, when I hear Nabby go on like this, it makes me feel fortunate that I chose the householder ashrama. (actually, the householder ashrama chose me) I don't know that I'd pin it on non-householders. The average Purusha guy is pretty sensible and would be embarrassed by much of what Nabby says. Yea, but Nabby is a tweener. He's out in the world, but he's got that strong straight and narrow, no deviation vibe. Yes, you're right. Of course it's not a householder-purusha thing. It's just that Nabby gives off such a strong devotee vibe. There is no deviation. Could it be that Nabby is pulling everyone's collective leg on FFL? That he is not really a TB? Just getting everyone riled up with outrageous statements, And what would these outrageous statements be ? What I post is simply what I know to be truthful. That some here gets annoyed is just their guilt and stress because they know that they have been wasting their lives after quitting TM. I was referring to the B Creme and Space stuff - not really outrageous, I guess. Just very off the beaten path, for me at least. Your TM beliefs are/were the same as mine, altho I don't hold so strictly to them as you, and never was 100% convinced of some aspects. For example, even back in the 70's I did not feel that TM should be taught in public schools, altho MMY was having Jerry Jarvis and others defend the TMO in court. I just saw that issue as an area where MMY and I did not agree, at least as far as the Relative goes.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I also once got a private email from a lurker from Scandinavia who claimed that he knew Nabby and said that he had to leave the TMO because of mental problems and that he is well known in the movement in his country as being unbalanced and everyone in the movement there stays away from him as a result. I'd like to defend Nabby on this point. Most everyone here would be shunned by true believers in the movement for our beliefs. Just Nabby's beliefs about Benjamin Creme would be enough to make him an outcast. One thing I know for sure, if the movement shuns you, the better chance I am going to have something in common with you. I take the taste of the movement as an inverse measure of how interesting a person is likely to be. Nabby is a valued part of the misfit bus here IMO. He represents a POV that no TB would dare to share with the likes of this pirate ship! I agree with you totally on this Curtis - he is valued. And if he does actually believe what he writes, and I can see that he might, then more power to him if it creates a meaningful, coherent and spiritual world view for him. We all do that, one way or the other. Thank you both for posting this, much appreciated. Also to Judy; thank you for your balanced post. No-one likes to be lied/rumoured about. I certainly mean every word I write here. And sometimes, obviously, it's a treat to watch how all this dead wood on FFL get all excited :-) I think I have a clue to who Maharishi is, having studied Him closely for many years. I've never said I fully understand Him, He certainly still is an enigma. But a clue, yes I think I understand a little something of what His Mission was about. That He was the one to lay the ground for Maitrya's Emergence is, well, I certainly understand that is well above the top for most regular people. But similar things have happened before, as recently as roughly 2000 years ago. If I told Benjamin Creme; hey listen, Maharishi did this groundbraking ceremony for Maitreya during the last 70 years, it's all because of Him all this is happening, Mr. Creme would not agree (I think). He would say that the Emergence of Maitreya and the Masters of Wisdom coming into full view and seen by all, is the result of the growth of the collective consciousness during the last 100.000 years, in fact for the first time since Atlantis. And ofcourse Mr. Creme is right. What is happening now is not the work of one single individual. Many here on FFL, having wasted prescious time in guru-shopping will not like it, in fact they puke by the very thought. But for me, the single one most important person to usher in the Age of Enlightement will forever be Maharishi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was referring to the B Creme and Space stuff - not really outrageous, I guess. Just very off the beaten path, for me at least. These times are changing quickly. What is off the beaten path today could very well be regarded as mainstraim tomorrow.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama Will Win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Is it true that PUMA is a Republican founded and funded group? Definitely not. I think what you're referring to is a rumor that got started about the woman who founded the PUMA-PAC, which turned out not to be true; she's a long-time Democrat. I can give you the details if you're interested. There may be Republicans hiding out among the PUMAs, and it's not impossible some are contributing in the hope of furthering McCain's candidacy, but the people who consider themselves PUMAs do so because they're Hillary supporters. Not that many of those among Republicans. And again, it's important to recognize that many who've been supporting Hillary (moi included) are doing so not because they think she's the cat's meow but because they really, really don't like Obama. Seems kinda Nixonian. How so? I wonder how much dough Sean Hannity has donated? Interesting that Hillary supporters line up with them instead of working on getting a Democrat elected. Line up with Republicans, you mean? Not all of them by any means are doing that. Some say they'll vote for Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party; some say they'll leave the choice for president blank but vote for downticket Dems; some say they'll write in Hillary; some say they're going to stay home. Some *do* say they'll vote for McCain, not because they prefer a Republican but because he's a known quantity. I won't be voting for McCain, but I'm not sure what I will do yet. If there are really 18 million PUMAs, why don't they each donate a dollar to retiring Hillary's debt? There aren't anything like 18 million PUMAs; 18 million is the number who voted for her in the primaries. Many PUMAs *are* contributing to retire Hillary's debt, however.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
(snip) For example, even back in the 70's I did not feel that TM should be taught in public schools, altho MMY was having Jerry Jarvis and others defend the TMO in court. I just saw that issue as an area where MMY and I did not agree, at least as far as the Relative goes. (snip) That worked out really well. Look at what has happened the schools; Meditation could have saved many kids in school from the chaos the schools have become. But, that's the way it goes...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. You have posted this false argument before with no support, simply calling it traditional. Actually I did provide support, from four recent published articles: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-money14- 2008may14,0,1137125.story http://tinyurl.com/6rwqkp http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080605/pl_bloomberg/apktsglzmhzm http://tinyurl.com/5hk4pt http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/08/obama-camp-faces-major- ob_n_100928.html http://tinyurl.com/5x5vvw http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-14- campaign-debt_N.htm http://tinyurl.com/5u59qp That's from post #179401 if you want to check. That simply isn't true, as Sunshine Sal pointed out to you. Sal is simply incorrect, as are you. See my response to her in post #179429. They don't *always* do it, but they *frequently* do. It isn't something Hillary dreamed up all on her own. There have been instances where candidates who were on good terms helped a failed campaign retire a small debt. i.e. 10k To help retire a debt that was recklessly and imprudently driven to, say, 22 million dollars is foolish. Actually she says she'll absorb the loan she made to her campaign herself, so it's about half that. If it's foolish to help her, then Obama's foolish, because he's offered to do so. He very badly needs at least to *appear* to be on good terms with her. He can't win without a very substantial portion of the votes of her 18 million primary supporters. That's also why she's unlikely to complain, at least publicly, if he doesn't live up to his promise, because, again, she wants to see a Democrat in the White House. (Note that he won't be giving her any of his campaign funds; that would be illegal. Rather, he's asking his maxed-out donors to give money to her.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama Will Win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom azgrey@ wrote: snip Is it true that PUMA is a Republican founded and funded group? Definitely not. I think what you're referring to is a rumor that got started about the woman who founded the PUMA-PAC, which turned out not to be true; she's a long-time Democrat. I can give you the details if you're interested. There may be Republicans hiding out among the PUMAs, and it's not impossible some are contributing in the hope of furthering McCain's candidacy, but the people who consider themselves PUMAs do so because they're Hillary supporters. Not that many of those among Republicans. And again, it's important to recognize that many who've been supporting Hillary (moi included) are doing so not because they think she's the cat's meow but because they really, really don't like Obama. (snip) And many Obama supporters(moi included) like Obama, and think he will be a great leader. And likewise, I believe Hillary felt 'entitled' to the nomination because she is married to Bill. Bill is the one that ruined her chances... She stayed with him during his many lies and adulterous adventures, and it came back to bite her on her fat ass. She makes a better supporter of 'Strong dominant men', Instead of pretending to be a strong dominant man herself( remember the shots of Whiskey in the bar- pathetic) It's not that I dislike Hillary; It's just that she is a big fake. So, you go and vote for McCain. Many will. We'll see who wins. Could be this country is too far gone for anyone to pull it back to any kind of sanity at this point.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amaranda Bhairavan (Nandu) Returns to Fairfield in August
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Rice readings are done on a one-on-one basis. During each reading, Bhairavan uses a method of divination called Oti Nottam, developed by the odiyyas to see each person's astral body, karmic sheath (with its marma-chakra systems), mystic shield and all layers of mental realms. During this process Nandu invokes and becomes a vessel to his cluster of high energy beings that guide the session. As in Jyotish astrology, Nandu will share what he sees from the rice about a person's past, present and future tendencies. Blemishes, prana flow impairments and other harmful abnormalities are then detected and rituals will be done and remedies offered to repair them. Questions can also be asked. I think my only question is whether he needs to use brown rice to do a reading for people of color. Then again for really exciting results, you can use wild rice...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Quinnipiac: Obama Opens Lead Nationally
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With commanding leads among women and young voters and near unanimous support from black voters, Sen. Barack Obama has a 50% to 41% lead over Sen. John McCain, according to a new Quinnipiac poll of likely voters released today. Today's poll from Rasmussen has Obama at 47%, McCain at 45%, a dead heat, within the margin of error, down from Obama 49% to McCain 44% at the beginning of July. http://tinyurl.com/67pgnn
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: And as far as that poster claiming the TMO kicked a guy out of the Fairfield flying hall because he was flying. Not even worth a response 30 years is a long time for someone without perspective. As for the rumour about that flying fellow who was kicked out of the Dome ? It's an obvious lie but that should most definately not stop Rick Archer from perpetuating it since this is your main field of interest. I posted that I had spoken to a woman, I can't remember her name right now, hopefully I will remember... She was always regarded as having advanced experiences and I had no reason not to believe her. She told me that she had started to experience a more advanced form of levitition and was asked to leave the dome, because it was too destracting to other's in the dome. I will do research on this and report back when I can remember more. This conversation took place back around 1992...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- On Tue, 7/15/08, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2008, 6:32 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: And as far as that poster claiming the TMO kicked a guy out of the Fairfield flying hall because he was flying. Not even worth a response 30 years is a long time for someone without perspective. As for the rumour about that flying fellow who was kicked out of the Dome ? It's an obvious lie but that should most definately not stop Rick Archer from perpetuating it since this is your main field of interest. I posted that I had spoken to a woman, I can't remember her name right now, hopefully I will remember... She was always regarded as having advanced experiences and I had no reason not to believe her. She told me that she had started to experience a more advanced form of levitition and was asked to leave the dome, because it was too destracting to other's in the dome. I will do research on this and report back when I can remember more. This conversation took place back around 1992... Sorry, Absolutely untrue. Nobody was flying in either the men's or women's domes in the early 90's. How the hell people can believe this is just amazing. Again, I'd love it if someone actually flew, but it has not happened. True lack of intellectual discrimination if you belief somebody has flown. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: U.S. Immigration
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: off_world_beings wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: off_world_beings wrote: Many Americans cannot afford to retire in this country. I can. OffWorld FYI, many Argentinians thought they were set for retirement before 2000. Then look what happened. Ha ha, they were a military junta up until a couple of decades ago. Hardly a worthy comparison ! OffWorld Don't be such an idiot. They had a flourishing economy. They had retirement funds including 401Ks. Many professionals including doctors, lawyers , college professors, etc, all lost their savings and retirement funds. Many had to sell their homes just to survive. Thing is the IMF has been warning the same thing could happen to the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_economic_crisis_(1999-2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_economic_crisis_(1999-2002 ) http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=rH6_i8zuffs http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=rH6_i8zuffs Don't be such an idiot. Argentina was barely out of military junta for more than a couple of decades. You try starting a capitalist economy straight out of a fascist one. Go ahead try it someday. But you are right, it will happen to the US, but the difference is that the US will be uplifted by the selling off to foreigners of the best real estate and companies, as is already happening. Now it is is going to speed up. It is so great taking back what is rightfully ours. OffWorld
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R.G. Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 5:33 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I quit I posted that I had spoken to a woman, I can't remember her name right now, hopefully I will remember... She was always regarded as having advanced experiences and I had no reason not to believe her. She told me that she had started to experience a more advanced form of levitition and was asked to leave the dome, because it was too destracting to other's in the dome. She probably wasn't levitating, but making some noises or new contortions which she defined as an advanced form of levitation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: U.S. Immigration
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Off: Ha ha, they were a military junta up until a couple of decades ago. Hardly a worthy comparison ! Bhairitu; Don't be such an idiot. They had a flourishing economy. They had retirement funds including 401Ks. Many professionals including doctors, lawyers , college professors, etc, all lost their savings and retirement funds. Many had to sell their homes just to survive. Thing is the IMF has been warning the same thing could happen to the US. I suggest you don't confront Off with facts. He just hates facts, especially when they go against his pre-conditioned beliefs. And he has the cutest ostrich asana you've ever seen. That's just gay. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip It's not traditional at all, it happens, but it's the exception rather than the rule, was the clear message from the articles. Sal, you embarrassed yourself on this the first time around; why step in it again? Let's have another look at what I quoted in my post from those articles in response to you the first time, shall we? From the first article: The ultimate winner often helps the penultimate winner repay debt, said Chris Lehane, a former Clinton White House aide, who is not part of Sen. Clinton's campaign. From the second article: It's not unusual for a winner to help a vanquished rival retire campaign debts. From the third article: A winning candidate often offers to do whatever is legal to help a loser pay down debts. From the fourth article: It's not atypical for a winning candidate to assist financially in relieving some of the opposing campaign's debt, said Anthony Corrado, a campaign-finance expert at Colby College in Maine who is not affiliated with a campaign. I would expect Sen. Obama to extend support. And three new ones: AP, May 13: That is a normal thing when a candidate finishes a race and loses, the winning candidate would try to help if there's some debt that's been incurred, said Tad Devine, a Democratic consultant who has worked in several presidential campaigns but is unaligned this year. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24594032/ FoxNews.com, Susan Estrich, July 10: It's an old tradition in politics for the winner to help the losers retire their debt. http://tinyurl.com/6xjctw NY Times, May 9: Mr. Obama suggested today that there would be some precedent for helping erase her debt. I think historically after a campaign is done and you want to unify the party particularly when you've had a strong opponent, Mr. Obama said, you want to make sure that you're putting that opponent in a strong position so that they can work to win an election in November. http://tinyurl.com/4thjw3 So, in order, we've got often, not unusual, often, not atypical, normal, an old tradition, and--from Obama himself--historically. Yet you claim it's the exception rather than the rule.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Nabby and Judy are my *research assistants*. Don't anyone drive them away. :-) Barry, when Andrew tried that ploy, it didn't *work*, remember?
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, Absolutely untrue. Nobody was flying in either the men's or women's domes in the early 90's. How the hell people can believe this is just amazing. Again, I'd love it if someone actually flew, but it has not happened. True lack of intellectual discrimination if you belief somebody has flown. Dear Mr. Shrink; intellectual discrimination has nothing to do with Yogic Flying. Yogic Flying has to do with a field of knowledge you know little; Vedic Science. Yogic Flying is being perfected by Sidhas and Governors right now as we speak. Sooner than you think, everything dear to your intellectual discrimination will be put where it belongs; on the scrapyard of history.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I quit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) For example, even back in the 70's I did not feel that TM should be taught in public schools, altho MMY was having Jerry Jarvis and others defend the TMO in court. I just saw that issue as an area where MMY and I did not agree, at least as far as the Relative goes. (snip) That worked out really well. Look at what has happened the schools; Meditation could have saved many kids in school from the chaos the schools have become. But, that's the way it goes... Thanks for posting this. If only 10% of all of Maharishis strong suggestions for implementing Vedic Science in America had been implemented in that country, it would face a very different karma than currently.
[FairfieldLife] Neat stuff
Gorgeous satellite images of earth: http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/30-most-incredible- abstract-satellite-images-of-earth/1324 http://tinyurl.com/599hvr Green demolition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwf9LoS9Xt8 Amazing starling formation: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=8704649 h/t for all three: Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish blog http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. There's no tradition whatsoever of primary winners helping losers retire their debt. There have been cases in which candidates on track to win the nomination have helped out a laggard in exchange for the laggard dropping out early and thus saving everyone money. Hillary did just the opposite - forcing both of them to pony up millions more so she could stick it out till the end despite no chance of winning. snip Obama is a better speaker, more intelligent, more universal leader for the United States and the World. I'll give him better speaker. Hillary will do alright; I wouldn't worry about her finances too much. Why would you? Where exactly did I say I was worried about her finances?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
On Jul 15, 2008, at 7:04 PM, boo_lives wrote: There's no tradition whatsoever of primary winners helping losers retire their debt. There have been cases in which candidates on track to win the nomination have helped out a laggard in exchange for the laggard dropping out early and thus saving everyone money. Hillary did just the opposite - forcing both of them to pony up millions more so she could stick it out till the end despite no chance of winning. Thanks, boo, not to mention that HIllary's debt is so huge now, that if Obama were to help her retire it in any significant way, he'd basically have no time to campaign. I'm not positive, but I think her debts are pretty much unprecedented. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that were the motive behind her sticking it out for so long to begin with, putting him in a lose/lose position. Don't help her out, look like an ungallant winner. *Do* help her, and have no time to run his own. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: U.S. Immigration
off_world_beings wrote: But you are right, it will happen to the US, but the difference is that the US will be uplifted by the selling off to foreigners of the best real estate and companies, as is already happening. Now it is is going to speed up. It is so great taking back what is rightfully ours. OffWorld Apparently not as this is looking like it is going to be a global crash too. Probably even effecting Spain.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Shemp and Nabby are neck to neck as they round the corner! Yahoo Groups Post Counter = Start Date (UTC): Sat Jul 12 00:00:00 2008 End Date (UTC): Sat Jul 19 00:00:00 2008 -- Searching... 432 messages as of (UTC) Wed Jul 16 00:17:18 2008 Member Posts shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] 39 nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 39 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] 37 Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED]28 Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED]27 TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]24 ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED]20 off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16 R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED]16 curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13 Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11 cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11 Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED]10 BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9 lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 bettyblue109 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7 John [EMAIL PROTECTED]7 Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7 bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]5 satvadude108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED]4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED]3 geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED]3 wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED]3 dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED]2 feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED]2 do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Zoran Krneta [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-B 1 Donal Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]1 Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED]1 John [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 sriswamijisadhaka [EMAIL PROTECTED]1 gds444 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]1 posters: 44 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. There's no tradition whatsoever of primary winners helping losers retire their debt. I'm sorry, but you're wrong on this, as are Sal and Tom. Even Obama disagrees with you. It's not *always* done, but it's done often enough that nobody should be surprised he's doing it for Hillary.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that were the motive behind her sticking it out for so long to begin with, putting him in a lose/lose position. Don't help her out, look like an ungallant winner. *Do* help her, and have no time to run his own. No, Sal. She stuck it out for so long because she was absolutely convinced he couldn't win, and she wanted a Democrat in the White House. She still wants a Democrat in the White House, though, so she'll do everything she can to help him win, including raising money for his campaign and rallying her own supporters. He really doesn't have to do a lot to help her retire her debt; it's not going to take away any significant time from his campaign. He won't be doing that much of it himself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Obama's effort to pay Hillary's campaign debts might not be enough to please Hillary. He should hold those funds as leverage to insure cooperation. He doesn't need any leverage. She wants to see a Democrat in the White House whether he helps pay her debts or not. (snip) Why should anyone but Hillary be responsible for her debts. It's traditional that primary winners help the losers retire their campaign debt. This isn't a new wrinkle. You have posted this false argument before with no support, simply calling it traditional. That simply isn't true, as Sunshine Sal pointed out to you. There have been instances where candidates who were on good terms helped a failed campaign retire a small debt. i.e. 10k To help retire a debt that was recklessly and imprudently driven to, say, 22 million dollars is foolish. Obama isn't attempting to retire CLinton's loans to herself. Lawson
