[FairfieldLife] Jesus describing TM?

[cardemaister]

1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his 
rest [Transcendental, Pure C? -- card], any of you should seem to come short of 
it.
2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word 
preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith [shraddhaa -- card] in 
them that heard it . [the word...: Gr. the word of hearing] [not being...: or, 
because they were not united by faith to]
3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in 
my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished 
from the foundation of the world.
4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did 
rest the seventh day from all his works.
5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom 
it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: [it was: or, the 
gospel was]
7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a 
time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of 
another day. [Jesus: that is, Joshua]
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. [rest: or, keeping of 
a sabbath]
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own 
works, as God did from his.
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the 
same example of unbelief. [unbelief: or, disobedience]
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged 
sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the 
joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart 
[J. describing the effect of
a biija-mantra, e.g. viveka?]
13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all 
things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the 
heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of 
our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain 
mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@ wrote:
 
 
  
  You've got the timing wrong.  I remember the first residence course I was
  on which had a governess, one of the first back from Switzerland.   
 
 For what its worth, some recollections of the history as I saw it. 
 
 Depends perhaps on what first back means relative to to progression of 
 courses. I was on two back to back 6 mo courses, spring of 2006-spring 2007. 
 There was a 6 mo course before us where, as I understand, some 
 experimentation with sidhis was done. On my first course, we worked on yoga 
 sutras amd sidhis most of the six months, more than the current standard 
 fare, but flying was not done. And the CPs from that course were not govs and 
 did not go back and teach prep sidhis. That happened for CPs in the course 
 that ended spring of 77. We broke into teams of four, divided up the world 
 (ha), though that went pretty smoothly, logically, and then went out and 
 taught prep sidhha courses, and flew 2x in our group. 
 
 From what I recall, MMY did not emphasize we were special or anything, but 
 did emphasize to be one pointed. And simple -- a sidha leaves the table 
 still a bit hungry was said -- and was a general theme of our activity, 
 though sometimes more, sometimes less.  And we were never told to be aloof. 
 We blended in and became a part of the meditator community. Like a big group 
 of friends. And we had some amazing CPs so humility was natural. We were much 
 more on the level of the meditators than the prior org, in my view. Not like 
 the four shanks of Regional past. Not at all the same gig or vibe. (And not 
 like those sleazy state coordinators, :)) 
 
 There were the famous superman posters were drawn up on that course (in 
 suisse) and passed around. But we saw that as more of a joke. Back home, in 
 the field, we focused on our program, and the teaching, which was wonderful, 
 the CPs were great, but was more a gig to allow us to do our program. Which 
 we were totally stoked on doing for our own personal benefit. Not a we need 
 to sacrifice and save the world thing. And program in those days was great. 
 Maybe because it was so new. And the whole thing was fun. I remember we got 
 laughing so hard, the four of us up front during a group meeting that I fell 
 off my chair literally laughing. The CPs were all part of that. There was a 
 real group consciousness of laughter -- and respect between everyone. A very 
 light atmosphere. In beautiful surroundings. And amazing people would emerge 
 asking to be on staff, for RB and some course credits. It was a sweet time.  
 
 It was odd a bit in that we were apparently the new organization, as state 
 and regional coordinators were dissolved when we hit the streets. M wanted a 
 very flat organization with only one level between him and the meditators and 
 sidhas.  So CPs and the community may have seen us as a new wave and attached 
 whatever was in their heads to that. However, we were pretty humble and 
 focused on our program, and getting the word out on this new knowledge, to 
 make it available to all of the centers in our area. If anything we felt way 
 unspecial and not up to the task we had been given. But things worked out. 
 Wonderful support from all. People did lots of nice things to help the whole 
 thing unfold. And we really tried to give back and give credit to the 
 centers. 
 
 We heard and saw some feedback where some CPs and all would make some 
 superficial eal about this or that attribute of one or all of us. But it was 
 silly, maybe unstressing sort of thing. We did not take it seriously. We knew 
 we were yokels just trying to have a roof over our heads while we did 
 program. Program was the ting --for our own unfoldment, not the world.
 
 Later it began to unravel. Lack of vigilence one of M's often used words of 
 the time. Details are unimportant, but within 6 months, things did change. 
 Not so much a being special thing, just the opposite but more incompetence, 
 clumsy thing. Quite unspecial in that regard. 
 
 Overall it was fun for all (or most) I think. Consciousness playing. 


Very nice report, much like I remember it also.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[merudanda]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher no_reply@... wrote:

 Researchers discovered  in the early 90s that Lenz in his craziness
had
 actually became the first form of the humanoid known as Kenny G ...and
his son [;)]

Kenny G with his son, Max G
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9KLAltIol4feature=related

His music is noticeably  quite  popular in China. DAMM YOU PRANA (lol)
hearing his Going Home often played at closing time at public places
or at the end of classes at schools there (Mass transit systems in
Tianjin and Shanghai play his songs too when trains approach terminus
stations) will remind me now always of Rama(what a Lenz) and turquoiseb
[:D]
Jasmine Flower
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j58W1WjX9Ckfeature=fvst
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxSeKjGAeSI

[FairfieldLife] Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

To some extent, I've been less charmed by the latest two episodes of
HBO's Enlightened while watching it, but in retrospect I've realized
that Mike White and Laura Dern *are* still dealing with material that is
relevant to FFL and to the cult of spiritual narcissism; it's just more
subtle than in the first 2 episodes.

It's now been a week since Amy has returned from her idyllic (although
enforced) retreat in Hawaii. Her epiphany -- whatever it was -- had
faded in significance, and now she's focused on trying to still live an
enlightened life out in the real world. In Ep4, confronted with her
first weekend, she has to figure out what to do with it.

She first decides to spend it meditating, which gives us a classic (and
hilarious) opportunity to listen to her inner thoughts in pretty much
the classic TMer meditation. That is, all thoughts, no silence, all
trivia and self-involvement. Her first thoughts are about being 40 and
having wrinkles. Then she comes back to the mantra and tries to
visualize something more positive, and lapses into thoughts of a happier
time. But then, inspired by visions of that happy time, she sets out to
recreate this fantasy happier time. And that's where the trouble begins.

She phones her ex-husband in the middle of the night, waking him, and
tells him that he's just got to go off river rafting with her. At 7:00
AM the next morning. And here's where the connection to TM and to
cultism comes in; she doesn't *ask* him whether he wants to go, she
tells him that he needs to, and makes the reservations herself. Being
essentially a nice guy, he thinks she's crazy, but agrees to go anyway.
They get there, are out on the river, and for a few minutes both are
feeling a little of the fantasy happiness she was seeking.

But then reality intrudes. She finds that he brought along a bag full of
drugs and, offended in the way that only a New Age twif can be offended,
throws them away. He goes ballistic, and storms away, her following. As
he finds a new stash and gets high, she harangues him with what a
low-life he is, continually insisting that she's doing it for his own
good, trying to get him to become the person he could be. Problem is,
it's not the person he wants to be. From his POV (and, by this time, the
audience's), *she* is the one living in a delusional world, and worse,
she's consistently treating not only him but *everyone* around her as if
they're lesser than she is. The *only* way she can imagine interfacing
with these lesser people is to try to convert them, to infect them
with her hypomania and make them more like her. Fortunately Levi (Luke
Wilson) finally has it up to here with her condescending, superior BS
and tells her to fuck off and leave him alone. He tells her something
she has never realized, that the way she sees him makes him feel like
shit, because she sees him *as* shit, compared to her and her new
fantasy lifestyle.

That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
-- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
things should be on others is ethically deficient.

Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
movement.

Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.

Me, in this rap and in any of my others, I'm not trying to change any of
you and make you more like anything, much less me. All I do occasionally
is point out that there are many on this forum who ARE trying to change
you and make you more like them. If you like that, and like being
treated like children by those who feel that they are entitled to treat
you that way, go for it. I'm going to -- as Curtis suggests -- focus
more on ignoring the entitled and hanging out with folks who are a
little more like adults.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[Susan]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote:
 
  So you keep talking about Maharishi in great analysis and detail to keep 
  from thinking about how Lenz fucked up your head and heart? 
  
  That's what it looks like. Freddy was exceptionally gifted and insecure. 
  Probably suffering parental rejection, so he got together a few of you and 
  made sure HE was the boss, HE was the Guru. You kissed HIS butt, but you 
  get the picture- you lived it. Now instead of coming to grips with it, you 
  deflect everything about Lenz onto Maharishi. 
  
  Free clue: Grow a pair and start living in the present and/or see a 
  therapist about the Lenz shit and clear yourself out. Its kind of pathetic 
  to see you in this state, all blind to it and misguidedly throwing all of 
  your pain on Maharishi. After all, Lenz was the mentally ill one, the crazy 
  one, the one you can't grow past even now.
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote:
  
   This is not a counter rebuttal, simply another view, a point for further 
   discussion and examination. 
   
   The tipping point was when a portion (I think it was 11.73% but others 
   may quibble on this)of the full time community -- and some ardent 
   part-timers, kept clung to the notion that M. and his TMOs were all 
   about, only about, the seven step program for teaching 20 min 2x / day. 
   
   A parallel is Apple and Steve Jobs.  When he went more digital (i-tunes, 
   i-phone) and creating superb customer experiences (Apple stores) etc, 
   many of the faithful said, Huh, what does this have to do with selling 
   Macs and What possible effect can a company with 3% market share have 
   on digital music. Steve's vision was that Apple was a digital gateway 
   company (or something along those lines with a core emphasis on superb 
   design.
   
   Apple would not be the company with the largest market capitalization in 
   the world (subject to check) and Steve Jobs would not be revered as the 
   CEO of the decade(s), if he limited his vision to selling Macs.   
   
   M. and his TMOs, in my view, were / are about being a Consciousness 
   gateway org -- not limited to 20 min 2x, but having 50 product lines 
   that enable Consciousness to shine in all parts of a persons life. Yet 
   many whined, when will we get OUR old TMO back, 20 min 2x. When will M 
   come to his senses and do what he is supposed to do, teach TM.
   

   
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
   
The sense of near-desperation with which some on this forum are hoping
that Oprah is the new Merv and that TM is finally on the upswing again
left me thinking about its past, and trying to pinpoint where it all
went wrong. Many have speculated on this forum about what that phase
transition moment was, the point at which it all began to unravel and
go downhill. For many (including luminaries like Charlie Lutes and Jerry
Jarvis), that point was the introduction of the TM-Sidhi program. Me, I
have a different theory, and I'm going to rap about it in a little
mini-essay today. Be warned...this may be a little long (although not
the length of Robin's epics), and it may piss a few people off. But it's
what I honestly believe.

I cannot pinpoint the exact day or month or year in which TMers went
officially bat shit crazy (some TM historian type here may be able to do
that for us),
 
 The day? Organizationally?  Turqb, it was in the Spring of '77 on a day when 
 the whole TM teaching organization got overturned by Maharishi at the end of 
 a huge governor (siddhis) training course in Switzerland.  As the Maharishi 
 was preparing to dis-band the course and have people (many of the active 
 teaching organization at the time) go home, things changed from that point.   
 Before this the organizational evaluation of how the movement was doing was 
 in how the new initiations of new meditators were doing and also in the 
 numbers of mediators coming to residence courses.  In a meeting the whole 
 hierarchical order of the teaching organization was sorted, turned out and 
 replaced by 'teams' of teachers with Bevan, Neil and the Wilsons on top and 
 everyone else spun off.  After this re-organization happened the evaluation 
 shifted over to being in the numbers of people going to group practice of the 
 Siddhis.  From this it then became about the numbers in group practice of 
 TM-siddhis.  The teaching organization and that program got lost from then.  
 The physics discussion around the Meissner Effect had preceded that time.
 
 I was there and got to witness this happen.  It was a time.
 
 -Buck

Doug, I do think you have it right.  I remember that time - I had already gone 
on an earlier 6 month course. Then this new group returned to the center and 
basically took over - simply 

[FairfieldLife] Today's feature state: Minnesota

[Tom Pall]

Minnesota became the 32nd state on May 11, 1858 and was originally settled
by a
lost tribe of Norwegians seeking refuge from the searing heat of Wisconsin's
winters.

Minnesota gets its name from the Sioux Indian word mah-nee-soo-tah,
meaning, No, really... They eat fish soaked in lye.

The state song of Minnesota is Someday the Vikings will... Aw, never mind.

The Mall of America in Bloomington , Minnesota covers 9.5 million
square feet and has enough space to hold 185,000 idiot teenagers
yapping away on cell phones.

Madison , Minnesota is known as the lutefisk capital of the world.
Avoid this city at all costs.

The Mary Tyler Moore Show was set in Minneapolis , Minnesota , and
was Mary's first real acting job since leaving the Dick van Dyke
Show. The show about a single woman's struggle to find happiness in
the big city was originally titled Life Without Dick, but that was
changed for some reason.

Downtown Minneapolis has an enclosed skyway system covering 52 blocks,
allowing people to live, work, eat, and sleep without ever going
outside. The only downside to this is that a Norwegian occasionally
turns up missing.

Cartoonist Charles M. Shultz was born in Minneapolis , Minnesota and
grew up in St. Paul . He was the only artist to accurately depict the
perfectly circular heads of Minnesota natives.

The Hormel Company of Austin , Minnesota produces 6 million cans of
Spam a year, even though no one actually eats it. Spam is a prized
food in Japan  Hawaii--Spam sushi!!

Minnesota license plates are blue  white and contain the phrase
Blizzards on the 4th of July - you get used to it.

Frank C. Mars, founder of the Mars Candy Co. Was born in Newport ,
Minnesota . His 3 Musketeers candy bar originally contained three bars
in one wrapper, each filled with a different flavor of nougat -
chocolate, Spam and lutefisk.

Tonka trucks continue to be manufactured in Minnetonka , Minnesota ,
despite the thousands of GI Joe dolls killed by them annually in
rollover accidents. No airbags, no seat belts. These things are
deathtraps, I tell ya!

Author Laura Ingalls Wilder was raised at Walnut Grove , Minnesota ,
and was famous for writing the Little House series of books, as well
as inventing the Spam diet which consists of looking at a plate of
Spam until you lose your appetite. Much like the lutefisk diet.

The snowmobile was invented in Roseau, Minnesota so as to allow
families a means of attending 4th of July picnics.

Minnesotans are almost indistinguishable from Wisconsinites. The only
way to tell them apart is to ask if they voted for Mondale in '84.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Jesus describing TM?

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@... wrote:

 
 1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his 
 rest [Transcendental, Pure C? -- card], any of you should seem to come short 
 of it.
 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word 
 preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith [shraddhaa -- card] 
 in them that heard it . [the word...: Gr. the word of hearing] [not being...: 
 or, because they were not united by faith to]
 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn 
 in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were 
 finished from the foundation of the world.
 4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God 
 did rest the seventh day from all his works.
 5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
 6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to 
 whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: [it was: or, 
 the gospel was]
 7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a 
 time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
 8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken 
 of another day. [Jesus: that is, Joshua]
 9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. [rest: or, keeping 
 of a sabbath]
 10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own 
 works, as God did from his.
 11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after 
 the same example of unbelief. [unbelief: or, disobedience]
 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged 
 sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the 
 joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the 
 heart [J. describing the effect of
 a biija-mantra, e.g. viveka?]

Most certainly not! ;-)



 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all 
 things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
 14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the 
 heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
 15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of 
 our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without 
 sin.
 16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain 
 mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

[FairfieldLife] News from the Occupy Movement

[martin.quickman]

http://sathyasaimemories.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/taking-back-power-yes-we-can/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Kansas Rural Students Done Good

[Tom Pall]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:37 PM, John jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:

 They're scoring on tests better than the world competition.


 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tiny-rural-kansas-district-students-performing-global-competition-195446967.html#more-17478


This is a shock?   There are pretty traditional schools in many farm states
and little towns.  With schools which still teach Latin and Greek.   I went
to a high school which hired the best teachers money could get.  I wondered
if there was a law about teachers working within 60 miles of where they
lived.  I didn't realize at the time that it was something special to have
teachers who were scholars in Chemistry or Latin or English Lit, with
masters to prove it and, incidentally, they had some education credits
under their belt.   This was a working class school system mostly and the
parents' and students' emphasis was on making something of ourselves.   And
indeed we did.  When students graduated out of our college prep track we
had our pick of colleges.  An amazing number of National Merit scholars,
perfect SATs and on and on.   I later found out the paddling was the norm
in the other surrounding school districts.  We never heard of such a
thing.  Yeah, we cut up a little but a look from a teacher and it stopped.
Then and there.  There's no need for diversity training, no need for touchy
feely courses, no need for no child left behind, a laptop in ever student's
hands.  We went on to prestigious school and just had books.   We developed
our sense of self worth thru scholarship, athletics, community service and,
yes, home ec.

It's the attitude of the parents which matters most.  The parents instill
the need for learning or the need to be litigious.  But we just can't or
don't want to grok that.

[FairfieldLife] Thousands of Buddhist monks in Asia learn Transcendental Meditation

[nablusoss1008]

* About us http://www.tm.org/blog/about/
* Learn the TM technique http://www.tm.org/contact-us/
* Contact Us http://www.tm.org/blog/contact-us/
* Link to Us http://www.tm.org/blog/link-to-us/
* Main TM website http://www.tm.org/
http://feeds.feedburner.com/Transcendental-Meditation-Blog   
http://twitter.com/tmmeditation   
http://www.facebook.com/TMmeditation   
http://www.youtube.com/meditationchannel
Transcendental Meditation (TM) Blog http://www.tm.org/blog

Meditation, People, Enlightenment, Research, Students, Videos and More

* Home http://www.tm.org/blog
* Enlightenment http://www.tm.org/blog/category/enlightenment/
* Maharishi http://www.tm.org/blog/category/maharishi/
* News http://www.tm.org/blog/category/news/
* People http://www.tm.org/blog/category/people/
* Research http://www.tm.org/blog/category/research/
* Students http://www.tm.org/blog/category/students/
* Video http://www.tm.org/blog/category/video/
* Yoga http://www.tm.org/blog/category/yoga/
Thousands of Buddhist monks in Asia learn Transcendental Meditation
by Bob Roth http://www.tm.org/blog/author/bob-roth/  on October 31,
2011
  [Post image for Thousands of Buddhist monks in Asia learn
Transcendental Meditation] 763Share
http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tm.org%2Fblog%2Fm\
editation%2Fbuddhist-monks%2Ft=Thousands%20of%20Buddhist%20monks%20in%2\
0Asia%20learn%20Transcendental%20Meditationsrc=sp
More than 3,000 Buddhist monks in 100 monasteries throughout Southeast
Asia have learned the Transcendental Meditation technique
http://www.tm.org/meditation-techniques?leadsource=CRM421 , as a
result of the work by a revered Japanese Buddhist
http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/japan/japanworkbook/religion/jbuddhis.htm\
l  monk, Reverend Koji Oshima, who is a longtime TM practitioner and
certified TM teacher.

According to Rev. Oshima, the Buddhist monks appreciate the simplicity,
effortlessness, and profound experience of transcendence, which is
gained almost immediately after starting the TM practice. Rev. Oshima
adds that transcendence provides the natural basis for the monk's
subsequent prayers and practices.

 
[http://www.tm.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Buddhist-monks-group-\
meditation-500px.jpg]

During Maharishi's http://www.tm.org/blog/category/maharishi/ 
many tours of Asian countries, he often visited monasteries and spoke
personally to many Buddhist leaders. One prominent monk in Sri Lanka,
who is now the leader, or Shan Kara, of one the three streams
of Buddhism in Sri Lanka
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhistworld/lanka-txt.htm , has
been instrumental in encouraging monks throughout the country to take TM
instruction from Reverend Oshima.
 
[http://www.tm.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Buddhist-Monks-500px.\
jpg]
Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka beginning their day with the practice of the
Transcendental Meditation technique
 
[http://www.tm.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Young-Buddhist-monks-\
mditating-200px.jpg]
Young students practicing the TM technique as part of their daily
routine at a Buddhist monastery in Thailand
Reverend Oshima said the younger monks are especially inspired by
Maharishi's integration of modern and ancient knowledge. They
were particularly interested in the Unified Field chart
https://consciousnessbasededucation.org/uploads/file/pdf/Sample%20UF%20\
Chart%20Physics.pdf , illustrating how the Unified Field of Natural Law
http://www.tm.org/blog/video/world-peace-from-the-quantum-level-david-l\
ynch-and-john-hagelin/ , as described by modern quantum physics, is
experienced directly during TM practice as the field of transcendental
consciousness, the field of Absolute Being.


Reverend Oshima has been awarded an honorary doctoral degree by
Maharishi University for the significant contributions he has made to
society by promoting the experience of Nirvana
http://library.thinkquest.org/28505/buddhism/nirva.htm —the
spiritual foundation for the achievement of the goals of Buddhism.
Through Reverend Oshima's travels and teaching of the Transcendental
Meditation technique
http://www.tm.org/meditation-techniques?leadsource=CRM421  he has
helped enliven the knowledge and direct experience of Absolute Being in
the lives of thousands of Buddhist monks—an influence that helps
heighten the peace, happiness and sustainable progress of these
monasteries and the world around them.


 
[http://www.tm.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Buddhist-monks-group-\
picture-500px.jpg]
Reverend Koji Oshima (center) with students who have learned the
Transcendental Meditation technique at a monastery in Thailand

Favorite Blog Posts:

The yoga sutra and deep meditation
http://www.tm.org/blog/meditation/the-yoga-sutra-and-deep-meditation/

Laozi – His mind becomes as vast and immeasurable as the night
sky
http://www.tm.org/blog/meditation/laozi-and-the-tao-te-ching-the-ancien\
t-wisdom-of-china/

Maharishi: A rare glimpse into the 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alcoholism and God

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote:

 Seriously Nabs - I remember a time in my 20's when I believed that all I had 
 to do was meditate, with hardly any thought to self reflection, or direction. 


A very good thing indeed !

A case of taking a teacher's words selectively, and literally. Luckily it 
didn't last.

It's a time in life for everything 



Took a shocking amount of sunlight afterward though, to stabilize all of that 
dye!
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote:
  
   I agree, terrible idea. I tried it - didn't work.
  
  
  HeHe :-)
  
  It's interesting to note that somewhere in the 12 steps, meditation is very 
  much empathized but somewhere along the passing of time this thingy of 
  helping others have gained more weight in the AA programme and it seems it 
  is now their full focus. This is not a critisism of AA, just an 
  observation. 
  
  
  
   
On Nov 1, 2011, at 5:58 PM, russell sedman wrote:

 To be told that meditation alone can solve personal problems is, in 
 my experience, not a workable solution.

  
  
 

[FairfieldLife] Adherents of Religion of Peace bomb French magazine

[Vaj]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-magazine-in-paris-is-firebombed.html?_r=3hp
Satirical Magazine Is Firebombed in ParisBy DAVID JOLLYPublished: November 2, 2011PARIS — The office of a French satirical magazine here was badly damaged by a firebomb early on Wednesday, the publisher said, after it published a spoof issue “guest edited” by the Prophet Muhammad to salute the victory of an Islamist party in Tunisian elections. The publication also said hackers had disrupted its Web site. Firefighters walked outside the damaged offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris on Wednesday. The magazine, Charlie Hebdo, had announced a special issue for publication Wednesday, renamed “Charia Hebdo,” a play on the word in French for Shariah law.The magazine’s editor, Stephane Charbonnier, told Europe 1 radio that the police had called just before 5 a.m. to report a fire of criminal origin. News reports said a Molotov cocktail had been thrown through a window. The special edition was on its way to the newsstands, the editor said, and will appear as scheduled.But, he added: “We are homeless and we have no way to put out the magazine. We hope this won’t be the last issue.”“We can’t put out the magazine under these conditions,” he said. “The stocks are burned, smoke is everywhere, the paste-up board is unusable, everything is melted, there’s no more electricity.”The magazine’s Web site appeared to have been restored by early Wednesday.Caustically ironic and vulgar, Charlie Hebdo prides itself on being offensive to virtually everyone. It has drawn the ire of Muslim activists before, including in 2006, after it republished cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that first appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten.Islamic law usually forbids depictions of the prophet. The edition of Charlie Hebdo that apparently inspired the fire-bombing showed a cartoon of Muhammad and the words: “100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter.” (...)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote:

 Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you manage to shriek 
 about MMM, the latest him being worse than Mao,

Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would correct you 
concerning this vicious lie pointing out that my point about Mao had to do with 
the unreliability of people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so 
many more millions who attributed God-like status on him and commented on his 
powerful presence filling Tienanmen Square.  I would accuse you of not only an 
outright lie but of an offensive one that trivializes the lives of the tens of 
millions who died under Mao.  Having corrected this lie in the past, we all 
know if you are lying blatantly and offensively.

But luckily for both of us, your egregious accusation came on in week when I 
have been getting criticized for not jumping in and correcting Barry's 
treatment of Robin, so all I have to do now is to wait for those angels of 
intervention who must certainly see how I have been wronged by this vicious 
lie, and will come to my rescue, chiming in as if in celestial unison about how 
a place like this does not tolerate such an outright liar, a deliberate 
misrepresentation of my point for the purposes of making me look like a 
demented idiot who would make such an absurd claim.

And through their examples, I will be edified in the proper way to police this 
board, how to intervene in the correct way to right such wrongs and to regain 
the moral high ground we all aspire to here.  If you weren't such a repulsive 
creature to me I would kiss you on what I can only imagine must be a  troll's 
wrinkly forehead whose hairline is receding faster than the coasts of Thailand.

I'm waiting.  (Crickets chirping through the crisp air.)


 your music simply SOUNDS like Hillbillymusic, in my ears.

I don't doubt that is true Nabbie.  It is because you are listening through 
your cult addled mind instead of your shrunken heart.  Glad they labeled Jimi's 
CD for you so you could tell what it was. If you had to use your own ears it 
might have sounded like polka music to you.









 
 http://tinyurl.com/67kzho3
 http://tinyurl.com/5s59bod

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:
snip
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially
 recently -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people 
 asserting that they not only have the right to try to change
 people they don't like, they've been asserting that it's some
 kind of ethical or moral duty, and that anyone who *doesn't*
 do as they do and try to impose their view of how things
 should be on others is ethically deficient.

Translation: People have been criticizing Barry's behavior
again, and this annoys him, because he believes he is
entitled to be immune from criticism. He believes he should
be free to treat the people he doesn't like as if they were
garbage, demonizing them, lying about them, and trying to
get others not to read their posts, without anybody--
including those he treats this way--uttering a peep of
protest.

 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does
 not compute. The only environment in which such a 'tude
 *does* compute is a cult, especially one that has a history
 of treating its members like children who need to be
 corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.

Only trouble is, most of the people who are criticizing
Barry have long since rejected the TM movement. 

 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed
 of adults.

Says Barry, who feels entitled to treat us all like
children and lecture us on how we ought to behave, as if
we need to be corrected by our betters (i.e., Barry).

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you manage 
  to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse than Mao,
 
 Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would 
 correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that 
 my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of 
 people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so 
 many more millions who attributed God-like status on him 
 and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen 
 Square. I would accuse you of not only an outright lie but 
 of an offensive one that trivializes the lives of the tens 
 of millions who died under Mao. Having corrected this lie 
 in the past, we all know if you are lying blatantly and 
 offensively.
 
 But luckily for both of us, your egregious accusation came 
 on in week when I have been getting criticized for not 
 jumping in and correcting Barry's treatment of Robin, so 
 all I have to do now is to wait for those angels of 
 intervention who must certainly see how I have been 
 wronged by this vicious lie, and will come to my rescue, 
 chiming in as if in celestial unison about how a place 
 like this does not tolerate such an outright liar, a 
 deliberate misrepresentation of my point for the purposes 
 of making me look like a demented idiot who would make 
 such an absurd claim.

LOL. Like that's gonna happen. 

You forget the golden rule -- angels of intervention
only feel the need protect those who agree with them
and are co-members of their spiritual vigilante squads. 
Gotta protect yer own homeboys.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daughter of Ravi Shankar

[merudanda]

thanks for posting and sharing this Gara , a rare raga  ,an independent
raga, as well as an additive fragrance to other ragas; and that too, in
two variants, a light classical piece so he has less restriction on what
and how he can play the sitar but sometimes mislabeled as Bhimpalasi in
the  West. Experts regards the raga as time-neutral. Other authorities
and  common practice accept its performance between 9.00 pm and
midnight.

Ravi Shankar:an excerpt from Shankar's four-hour performance at the 1967
Monterey Pop Festival:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPJ-Jbg2zeAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFj8jfhjJo

Ravi Shankar  his lovely Daughter
Anoushkahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG2moqxqIaE
Check out this too:
1. http://youtu.be/8anrbaISxSo
http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2F8anrbaISxSos\
ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
2. http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs
3. http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY
4. http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88 http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88
5. http://youtu.be/bQEqLSUDDNU
http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FbQEqLSUDDNUs\
ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
6. http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss
gives lesson to his daughter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igDsu5QWhpofeature=related

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daughter of Ravi Shankar

[tartbrain]

Maybe she and Nora can perform a duet sometime. Sultry sitar.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda no_reply@... wrote:

 thanks for posting and sharing this Gara , a rare raga  ,an independent
 raga, as well as an additive fragrance to other ragas; and that too, in
 two variants, a light classical piece so he has less restriction on what
 and how he can play the sitar but sometimes mislabeled as Bhimpalasi in
 the  West. Experts regards the raga as time-neutral. Other authorities
 and  common practice accept its performance between 9.00 pm and
 midnight.
 
 Ravi Shankar:an excerpt from Shankar's four-hour performance at the 1967
 Monterey Pop Festival:
 www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPJ-Jbg2zeAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFj8jfhjJo
 
 Ravi Shankar  his lovely Daughter
 Anoushkahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG2moqxqIaE
 Check out this too:
 1. http://youtu.be/8anrbaISxSo
 http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2F8anrbaISxSos\
 ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
 2. http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs
 3. http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY
 4. http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88 http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88
 5. http://youtu.be/bQEqLSUDDNU
 http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FbQEqLSUDDNUs\
 ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
 6. http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss
 gives lesson to his daughter
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igDsu5QWhpofeature=related

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

Barry,


That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
-- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
things should be on others is ethically deficient.

Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
movement.

Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.

Hey Barry,

Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get along 
here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not do...say,,,I 
not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  Now I read your 
first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and accused him of 
acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and you really let 
him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that way and that he 
is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few dustups after that 
because apparently some people here believe you were sadistic and offensive 
in those posts.

ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem to 
have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was just 
thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me now and 
like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find offensive.  Now I 
know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask that you be more like 
me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even encouraging you by not 
asking you to change in this way,so I hope you understand.

Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
here is what I am asking:

1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have any 
question about what this is the standard is Judy.

2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we might 
disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your judgement 
about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.

3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
to step in with a rolled up newspaper and tell you how bad you are.  This is a 
right I have been given because you and I don't fight here.  The reason we 
don't fight is not that we like each other but because of our alpha male pact 
which was sealed that night we crossed urine streams.  That was not gay even 
though we saw each other's wieners and in response to your unwarranted and 
sadistic chuckling at what you referred to as my peanut, I want you to know 
that some are for show and some are for grow.  Just because mine is neither, 
you had no right to ask me if I was going to clear my zipper.  And speaking of 
gay topics...

4. I don't think Robin is gay.  I don't know if you you were implying that he 
was or offensively stating it in a manor unpleasing to some other posters here, 
but I need you to think about him more as I do in this way too.  (And for the 
record if a guy wears women's clothes underneath male ones that is not 
trans-sexual it is just a question of comfort.)

5.  I have noticed that you are not as interested in the blues as I am.  I hope 
you will honor my friendship rights by changing this.

6.  You have been mean to Judy more than she has been mean to you by her count. 
 This is apparently meaningful.  Please take note.  In fact from her POV you 
are actually the only mean one and she has been forced (but not in a victim 
way) to respond to every one of your lies, misrepresentations and offensive 
putdowns of her for the last 16 years.  Please stop miscounting how many times 
she mentions you in her posts. (Please check with Judy for the technical 
reasons your count doesn't count.)  Please accept that her view is the 
objective reality and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alcoholism and God

[merudanda]

That's very witty Oscar Wildish.
The Oscar Wildish young lady dropped her baton, the double bass
disentangled himself, the music came to an abrupt and flourishing
finish, and the girlish ...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@...
wrote:

 I agree, terrible idea. I tried it - didn't work.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote:
 
  On Nov 1, 2011, at 5:58 PM, russell sedman wrote:
 
   To be told that meditation alone can solve personal problems is,
in my experience, not a workable solution.
 
  I agree, russell.  Did somebody here tell you that?
 
  Sal
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daughter of Ravi Shankar

[merudanda]

that's easy
Anoushka Shankar  Norah Jones -Easy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jguri1qOCY0feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=316xH6tgobQfeature=related
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:


 Maybe she and Nora can perform a duet sometime. Sultry sitar.


 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda no_reply@ wrote:
 
  thanks for posting and sharing this Gara , a rare raga  ,an
independent
  raga, as well as an additive fragrance to other ragas; and that too,
in
  two variants, a light classical piece so he has less restriction on
what
  and how he can play the sitar but sometimes mislabeled as Bhimpalasi
in
  the  West. Experts regards the raga as time-neutral. Other
authorities
  and  common practice accept its performance between 9.00 pm and
  midnight.
 
  Ravi Shankar:an excerpt from Shankar's four-hour performance at the
1967
  Monterey Pop Festival:
 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPJ-Jbg2zeAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFj8jfhjJo
 
  Ravi Shankar  his lovely Daughter
  Anoushkahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG2moqxqIaE
  Check out this too:
  1. http://youtu.be/8anrbaISxSo
 
http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2F8anrbaISxSos\
\
 
ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
  2. http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs http://youtu.be/ySG5YhT_CAs
  3. http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY http://youtu.be/7kD1UcTSttY
  4. http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88 http://youtu.be/Yn-Ctg1xB88
  5. http://youtu.be/bQEqLSUDDNU
 
http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FbQEqLSUDDNUs\
\
 
ession_token=dIQaMQfyxtgna0lBG74OgmgzL0F8MTMyMDMyNzUwNkAxMzIwMjQxMTA2
  6. http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss http://youtu.be/t1RVqVvj5ss
  gives lesson to his daughter
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igDsu5QWhpofeature=related
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you
  manage to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse
  than Mao,
 
 Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would
 correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
 my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
 people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so
 many more millions who attributed God-like status on him
 and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen
 Square.

This was one of your points. Another, however, had to
do with how both MMY and Mao staged their appearances
before their followers specifically to evoke this
subjective darshan experience that led their followers
to confer God-like status on them.

Other points involved personality traits the two of
them had in common, such as hypocrisy (concerning their
sexual dalliances, for example).

So in fact it wasn't just about the unreliability of
darshan experiences; you were comparing MMY and Mao as
human beings.

But you're quite right, Nabby is lying in one respect:
You never said MMY was *worse* than Mao. Rather, you
said MMY was a rather dim bulb compared to Mao.

Actually, in context, maybe that *does* qualify as
worse, and Nabby isn't lying after all.

(You tried this sort of approach once before, Curtis,
with regard to a different issue, and you fouled it up
then too. You just aren't very good at it. You have
trouble picking *parallels*, among other things.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.

And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
it's not my favorite kinda music.

I hope that this will help to keep us best buds, because as everyone
knows best buds have to agree with each other about pretty much
everything in life.

Yo,

Barry

P.S. For the record, I don't think Robin is gay either. I was merely
using a good one-liner I heard from somewhere to point out the
rather drama-queen-y / drag queen-y nature of some of his suck-up
verbiage. If I were to really guess as to his sexuality I would assume
him to be asexual, because I honestly can't see anyone that narcissistic
having a real-life relationship with anyone other than themselves, be
they male or female.

P.S.S. I sure hope that P.S. wasn't offensive. Could you check with the
standard-keeper for me?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 Barry,

 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially
recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that
they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like,
they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of
how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.

 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not
compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like
children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.

 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of
adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone
says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up
to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become
cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.

 Hey Barry,

 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you
said some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since
you and I get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could
uh do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might
find offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you
called him a drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to
treat him as a special person and you really let him have it and said
that you were not going to treat him that way and that he is boring to
you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few dustups after that
because apparently some people here believe you were sadistic and
offensive in those posts.

 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so
I seem to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and
all I was just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think
more like me now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others
might find offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a
bit far to ask that you be more like me but I've been accused of having
bad ethics and even encouraging you by not asking you to change in this
way,so I hope you understand.

 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and
for all, here is what I am asking:

 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you
have any question about what this is the standard is Judy.

 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting
please clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything
that we might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not
trust your judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the
professionals.

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[maskedzebra]

Dear Curtis,

There is an almost perfect correspondence between Nabbie saying what he said 
about your blues playing and B saying I am full of shit (euphemistically: 
drama queen).

I know your blues playing is real and compelling—it even disturbs me with how 
much more of you I feel when I listen to you.

I also know that you know, as a fact, that were I what B says I am, you would 
never have entered into those intense and exhausting but thrilling (pure joy 
according to you) conversations with me. So you know B is misperceiving reality 
when he says what he says about me (especially when he becomes vicious). Just 
as I know that Nabbie lacks objectivity when he adjudicates your performance as 
he has in his post.

What if I took Nabbie under my wing—and decided: I am going to protect Nabbie 
from all criticism? or at least I am going to defend his right to have this 
experience of your music. Saying: Well, Nabbie's experience is that Curtis's 
music sounds hillbilly. What can I do about that? And then, when I see how 
seriously you are defending yourself against this obtuse judgment of your 
music, how is this any different than my own use of irony to mock the 
insincerity and reflexive aversion that B has to my—and therefore to our—posts?

And what if Nabbie had a penchant for essentially saying that lots of people's 
music was stupid and tone-deaf? If he were my friend—I mean this, Curtis: 
listen up without fighting back—just for a moment, anyway: you will survive 
this intact: don't worry—I would attempt to tell him he was wrong—in my 
judgment. Else why would I—in this parallel—be keen on listening to music that 
I *knew* was good music? How many persons do you believe there are out there 
who can honestly and sincerely argue that our interactive posts over these 
eight months are, in the end, justifiably apprehended and judged according to 
how B chooses to characterize them?

What is wrong here, Curtis, is that B is unconsciously counting on your NEVER 
pulling the rug from under him—he doesn't know this; but it is a deep and 
vulnerable dependency. And you, in your acute sensitivity, recognize the extent 
to which B is psychologically at your mercy: as if, if you called him out (for 
his own sake) he might shatter. Such is the particular and peculiar nature of 
your bond with him.

No, Curtis, there is no one I have ever known in my life that I care about who 
I would defend by the implicit assumption that all opinions are equal. Nabbie's 
judgment of your music is not a true opinion. And I certainly believe you know 
in your conscience that the issues we have discussed in our posts go beyond the 
initial basis upon which B formed his judgment of me: cult talker. We have 
pretty much covered or touched upon everything—haven't we?

But here's where I am totally defeated: Motive. I *think* I understand your 
double-dealing with regard to B and me [and by the way: I do agree with you 
that in a sense I don't need defending: I find B's response to me challenging 
and useful, and it does not, despite what others may think, 'hurt' me—it 
confounds me, but that is not the same thing. Besides, I think, finally, I 
understand B's response to me]—but on another level I don't think I do. I know 
when I read your posts rationalizing your position vis-a-vis me and B that 
there is something subtly equivocal there. But I can't identify what it is. I 
do know this, though, Curtis: B's response has been good for me, and I am—you 
must believe this—entirely grateful to him.

The question becomes this, Curtis: What do you have to do to yourself in order 
to express a certain judgment of someone, or some thing. If I experienced that 
when B went off on me 
that he was being true to himself, that he was expressing the whole person that 
he is, then even if I violently disagreed with him, I would have to say to 
myself: Look, Robin Baby, this guy is sincere, and he is really giving it to 
you enthusiastically and with both barrels. As it is, B's response to me 
{and I know you agree with me here, Curtis, at least you did before we had this 
necessary falling out) doesn't do him any good. Because it is consciously 
reactive and separated from where he is in himself when talking to you 
(especially offline).

But you won't follow me here, so I should just leave that alone. You see, 
Curtis, I don't accept that B is just another poster at FFL with his own strong 
opinions. That is a falsehood and you know it. But why am I even writing here? 
Only because I firmly believe you are being two-faced and sophistical, even 
though your argument against this will be driven by an energy and 
determination—and talent—which will of course put into doubt everything I have 
said.

Look, I have loved you, Curtis. This is enough for me. If I have wronged you in 
any way, I apologize. I have said it before: what you have given me is more 
than I have given to you. I think most of our posts at FFL to be  quite 
fabulous things—and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
  
   Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you
   manage to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse
   than Mao,
  
  Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would
  correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
  my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
  people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so
  many more millions who attributed God-like status on him
  and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen
  Square.
 
 This was one of your points. Another, however, had to
 do with how both MMY and Mao staged their appearances
 before their followers specifically to evoke this
 subjective darshan experience that led their followers
 to confer God-like status on them.
 
 Other points involved personality traits the two of
 them had in common, such as hypocrisy (concerning their
 sexual dalliances, for example).
 
 So in fact it wasn't just about the unreliability of
 darshan experiences; you were comparing MMY and Mao as
 human beings.
 
 But you're quite right, Nabby is lying in one respect:
 You never said MMY was *worse* than Mao. Rather, you
 said MMY was a rather dim bulb compared to Mao.
 
 Actually, in context, maybe that *does* qualify as
 worse, and Nabby isn't lying after all.
 
 (You tried this sort of approach once before, Curtis,
 with regard to a different issue, and you fouled it up
 then too. You just aren't very good at it. You have
 trouble picking *parallels*, among other things.)

So I never said that Maharishi was worse than Mao despite your attempt to twist 
it into that with a clumsy two step.  It is obvious how Nabbie meant it and 
your attempts at obfuscation have failed.

And the upshot is for you to attempt to correct me about what point I was 
making rather than show some ethical disapproval for this blatant and offensive 
lie.

Thanks for being predictable.  Now you can drop the superior ethical facade 
because you have just proven how fake and self-serving the act was.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 To some extent, I've been less charmed by the latest two episodes of
 HBO's Enlightened while watching it, but in retrospect I've realized
 that Mike White and Laura Dern *are* still dealing with material that is
 relevant to FFL and to the cult of spiritual narcissism; it's just more
 subtle than in the first 2 episodes.

It sounds like an interesting show. Being bit torrent busted, I will have to 
wait for netflix to get it.
 
 It's now been a week since Amy has returned from her idyllic (although
 enforced) retreat in Hawaii. Her epiphany -- whatever it was -- had
 faded in significance, and now she's focused on trying to still live an
 enlightened life out in the real world. 

Because clearly we need enlightened individuals who on their own, have become 
spectacular beacons of light, independent of all the smucks around them, having 
transformed Consciousness, watered it , made it grow and evolve to fantastic 
higher states of Consciousness, not the dirty old Consciousness of the smucks. 

 In Ep4, confronted with her
 first weekend, she has to figure out what to do with it.

She has to figure out what to do with IT in relation to the world. Right on!   
 
 She first decides to spend it meditating, which gives us a classic (and
 hilarious) opportunity to listen to her inner thoughts in pretty much
 the classic TMer meditation. That is, all thoughts, no silence, all
 trivia and self-involvement. Her first thoughts are about being 40 and
 having wrinkles. Then she comes back to the mantra and tries to
 visualize something more positive, and lapses into thoughts of a happier
 time. But then, inspired by visions of that happy time, she sets out to
 recreate this fantasy happier time. And that's where the trouble begins.
 

It began there?

 She phones her ex-husband in the middle of the night, waking him, and
 tells him that he's just got to go off river rafting with her. At 7:00
 AM the next morning. And here's where the connection to TM and to
 cultism comes in; she doesn't *ask* him whether he wants to go, she
 tells him that he needs to, and makes the reservations herself. Being
 essentially a nice guy, he thinks she's crazy, but agrees to go anyway.
 They get there, are out on the river, and for a few minutes both are
 feeling a little of the fantasy happiness she was seeking.
 
 But then reality intrudes. She finds that he brought along a bag full of
 drugs 

Which are the Self, a wave on the infinite ocean of Consciousness. Whats her 
hang up?!

 and, offended in the way that only a New Age twif can be offended,
 throws them away. He goes ballistic, and storms away, her following. As
 he finds a new stash and gets high, she harangues him with what a
 low-life he is, continually insisting that she's doing it for his own
 good, trying to get him to become the person he could be. Problem is,
 it's not the person he wants to be. 

Maybe he doesn't want to be a person. Rather to be what he actually is.

 From his POV (and, by this time, the
 audience's), *she* is the one living in a delusional world, 

Because clearly they are not delusional, their mindstates, well if not 
enlightened, are well, like normal, good and true.

 and worse,
 she's consistently treating not only him but *everyone* around her as if
 they're lesser than she is. 

Because in the vastness and totality of silence, there are actually heirarchies 
of better and worse pockets of infinite silence. 

 The *only* way she can imagine interfacing
 with these lesser people is to try to convert them, to infect them
 with her hypomania and make them more like her. Fortunately Levi (Luke
 Wilson) finally has it up to here with her condescending, superior BS
 and tells her to fuck off and leave him alone. He tells her something
 she has never realized, that the way she sees him makes him feel like
 shit, because she sees him *as* shit, compared to her and her new
 fantasy lifestyle.
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed 

Sounds kinky. Have I been missing out on something?

 of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.


All good. Now we just got to find some adults to fill the forum.

 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[whynotnow7]

Well done. Watching this one from the sidelines (T/MZ), I agree we are all 
adults here, and it is just as valid for B to play the largely anti-social role 
that he does here, and have others give him back what he is putting out. Last I 
checked, that's the way it works. 

imo, no one, including you needs to acknowledge anything about anyone here. You 
are a big-hearted guy Curtis, and you probably see a kinship with B that 
dissuades him from going after you, and vice-versa. I kind of enjoy stripping 
away his layers, so to each his own. 

My *open declaration of self realization* really gets under his skin, although 
he continues to be a virgin spiritually. 

I am also tired of hearing who B doesn't like. His need to always dump his 
chamber pot from the second floor window onto the street below, is obnoxious, 
and judging from the responses he is getting here on FFL, more and more 
contributors think so too.

Granted, I don't have to read B's posts, although the way I look at FFL is as a 
whole - everybody contributes - like a cocktail party that goes on 24x7, with 
people wandering in and out - groups having discussions, so B is part of that 
mix, as are my comments about him.

This is my sketch of the groups at the FFL cocktail party, in no particular 
order:

A. Spiritual discussion groups
* God and no god
* TMO
* MMY
* Spiritual teachers
* Spiritual values
* Enlightenment
* The nature of reality

B. Cultural discussion groups
* TV and Movies
* Politics
* Art, video and sound
* Travel

C. Fairfield local

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Barry,
 
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
 
 Hey Barry,
 
 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
 things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get 
 along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not 
 do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  
 Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and 
 accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and 
 you really let him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that 
 way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few 
 dustups after that because apparently some people here believe you were 
 sadistic and offensive in those posts.
 
 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem 
 to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was 
 just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me 
 now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find 
 offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask 
 that you be more like me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even 
 encouraging you by not asking you to change in this way,so I hope you 
 understand.
 
 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
 here is what I am asking:
 
 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have 
 any question about what this is the standard is Judy.
 
 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
 clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we 
 might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your 
 judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.
 
 3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
 to step in 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:
snip
 Well I gave it a shot everyone.  And although I know in advance
 that it was not good enough to satisfy your views of my
 obligations here, it is the best that I can do with the 
 inconvenient intrusion of my own POV on all this.

You're a lot better than Barry at satire, but you
make just as much use of straw men in your satire as
Barry does in his lectures on how we should all
behave.

Straw men are fundamentally *dishonest*, of course. 
Satire doesn't need to stick to the truth as closely
as straight lecturing does, but the farther you
depart from truth, the less effective the satire.

(At least you have enough self-knowledge to avoid
criticizing people for doing what you yourself do
routinely. If you really wanted to help Barry out,
you might think about conveying to him privately
that his tendency to do this slaughters his own
points and makes him look ridiculous.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

I appreciate the heartfelt response.  The parallel is clear to me.  I handled 
Nabbie's idiocy just fine and my friends (or even detractors) can see that.  No 
one needs to intervene and help poor Curtis.  That is how I felt about your 
dealings with Barry. You both seemed to handle if just fine without my getting 
into it.  And with the length of our posts to each other I had a lot on my 
plate to focus on without getting into threads that did not hold my interest.  
I really don't care what Barry thinks of you or you think of Barry.  I go with 
my judgement on people here.

I am confused with your term double-dealings with you both. I am dealing with 
each of you from my perspective, not through the imagined eyes of each other.  
I still don't understand what it was that you expected me to do and why you 
felt that this was a legitimate expectation. I get the Judy angle which was 
predictable, but both you and Bob whose opinions I respect seemed to eel that I 
was obligated to react in some way.  Bob seemed to want me to label Barry's 
criticism as offensive rather than mean.  What is it that I was expected to do 
in your view?  And why is his misspreception of you any different from Nabbies 
of me?

And lets assume that your analysis of Barry is right and that it somehow hurts 
him: doesn't do him any good. Because it is consciously reactive and separated 
from where he is in himself when talking to you (especially offline).  Even if 
I shared this judgement, which I don't, what is your expectation in my role in 
helping him?  And what if I don't view my role, even in friendship as being 
helpful in this way?  The idea that we are deeply helping each other by 
pointing out flaws or correcting each other is really not one I share.  I 
believe that personal change is really hard and comes from an intense desire 
within.  If we have this desire we use everything outside to support it. I do 
not place myself in this role to initiate this with friends since I now believe 
our physiological needs are too complex to assess from outside this way.  

So I have been judged as not living up to some expectation by a few here.  OK, 
I can live with that.  Judy is opportunistic so I'll count her out here.  You 
and Bob seem sincere so I tried to consider what you were expecting and I 
rejected it for the most part.  I keep my eyes on my own interests here.  And 
that answers your question about what it takes for me to express my opinion 
about something here.  It needs to interest me.  I am not on a crusade like 
Judy, I am just a guy who likes to have conversations here as a stimulus to 
write and to think.  You are served as a great writing bu...oh shit...uh...I'm 
a little stuck here, partner?...Whoa too California do you take this man... 
Uh... I like you Robin.  I hope we can continue to have discussions here about 
mutually interesting topics.  I'm confident that we will find something other 
than Barry or my failings in respect to him to talk about. I trust only my own 
view of you Robin, and that is positive.



 Dear Curtis,
 
 There is an almost perfect correspondence between Nabbie saying what he said 
 about your blues playing and B saying I am full of shit (euphemistically: 
 drama queen).
 
 I know your blues playing is real and compelling—it even disturbs me with how 
 much more of you I feel when I listen to you.
 
 I also know that you know, as a fact, that were I what B says I am, you would 
 never have entered into those intense and exhausting but thrilling (pure 
 joy according to you) conversations with me. So you know B is misperceiving 
 reality when he says what he says about me (especially when he becomes 
 vicious). Just as I know that Nabbie lacks objectivity when he adjudicates 
 your performance as he has in his post.
 
 What if I took Nabbie under my wing—and decided: I am going to protect Nabbie 
 from all criticism? or at least I am going to defend his right to have this 
 experience of your music. Saying: Well, Nabbie's experience is that Curtis's 
 music sounds hillbilly. What can I do about that? And then, when I see how 
 seriously you are defending yourself against this obtuse judgment of your 
 music, how is this any different than my own use of irony to mock the 
 insincerity and reflexive aversion that B has to my—and therefore to 
 our—posts?
 
 And what if Nabbie had a penchant for essentially saying that lots of 
 people's music was stupid and tone-deaf? If he were my friend—I mean this, 
 Curtis: listen up without fighting back—just for a moment, anyway: you will 
 survive this intact: don't worry—I would attempt to tell him he was wrong—in 
 my judgment. Else why would I—in this parallel—be keen on listening to music 
 that I *knew* was good music? How many persons do you believe there are out 
 there who can honestly and sincerely argue that our interactive posts over 
 these eight months are, in the 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

If you really wanted to help Barry out,


This may be the essence of our disagreement Judy.  This is not a motive for me 
here.





 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 snip
  Well I gave it a shot everyone.  And although I know in advance
  that it was not good enough to satisfy your views of my
  obligations here, it is the best that I can do with the 
  inconvenient intrusion of my own POV on all this.
 
 You're a lot better than Barry at satire, but you
 make just as much use of straw men in your satire as
 Barry does in his lectures on how we should all
 behave.
 
 Straw men are fundamentally *dishonest*, of course. 
 Satire doesn't need to stick to the truth as closely
 as straight lecturing does, but the farther you
 depart from truth, the less effective the satire.
 
 (At least you have enough self-knowledge to avoid
 criticizing people for doing what you yourself do
 routinely. If you really wanted to help Barry out,
 you might think about conveying to him privately
 that his tendency to do this slaughters his own
 points and makes him look ridiculous.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote:
  
   So you keep talking about Maharishi in great analysis and detail to keep 
   from thinking about how Lenz fucked up your head and heart? 
   
   That's what it looks like. Freddy was exceptionally gifted and insecure. 
   Probably suffering parental rejection, so he got together a few of you 
   and made sure HE was the boss, HE was the Guru. You kissed HIS butt, but 
   you get the picture- you lived it. Now instead of coming to grips with 
   it, you deflect everything about Lenz onto Maharishi. 
   
   Free clue: Grow a pair and start living in the present and/or see a 
   therapist about the Lenz shit and clear yourself out. Its kind of 
   pathetic to see you in this state, all blind to it and misguidedly 
   throwing all of your pain on Maharishi. After all, Lenz was the mentally 
   ill one, the crazy one, the one you can't grow past even now.
   
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote:
   
This is not a counter rebuttal, simply another view, a point for 
further discussion and examination. 

The tipping point was when a portion (I think it was 11.73% but others 
may quibble on this)of the full time community -- and some ardent 
part-timers, kept clung to the notion that M. and his TMOs were all 
about, only about, the seven step program for teaching 20 min 2x / day. 

A parallel is Apple and Steve Jobs.  When he went more digital 
(i-tunes, i-phone) and creating superb customer experiences (Apple 
stores) etc, many of the faithful said, Huh, what does this have to do 
with selling Macs and What possible effect can a company with 3% 
market share have on digital music. Steve's vision was that Apple was 
a digital gateway company (or something along those lines with a core 
emphasis on superb design.

Apple would not be the company with the largest market capitalization 
in the world (subject to check) and Steve Jobs would not be revered as 
the CEO of the decade(s), if he limited his vision to selling Macs.   

M. and his TMOs, in my view, were / are about being a Consciousness 
gateway org -- not limited to 20 min 2x, but having 50 product lines 
that enable Consciousness to shine in all parts of a persons life. Yet 
many whined, when will we get OUR old TMO back, 20 min 2x. When will 
M come to his senses and do what he is supposed to do, teach TM.

 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:

 The sense of near-desperation with which some on this forum are hoping
 that Oprah is the new Merv and that TM is finally on the upswing 
 again
 left me thinking about its past, and trying to pinpoint where it all
 went wrong. Many have speculated on this forum about what that phase
 transition moment was, the point at which it all began to unravel and
 go downhill. For many (including luminaries like Charlie Lutes and 
 Jerry
 Jarvis), that point was the introduction of the TM-Sidhi program. Me, 
 I
 have a different theory, and I'm going to rap about it in a little
 mini-essay today. Be warned...this may be a little long (although not
 the length of Robin's epics), and it may piss a few people off. But 
 it's
 what I honestly believe.
 
 I cannot pinpoint the exact day or month or year in which TMers went
 officially bat shit crazy (some TM historian type here may be able to 
 do
 that for us),
  
  The day? Organizationally?  Turqb, it was in the Spring of '77 on a day 
  when the whole TM teaching organization got overturned by Maharishi at the 
  end of a huge governor (siddhis) training course in Switzerland.  As the 
  Maharishi was preparing to dis-band the course and have people (many of the 
  active teaching organization at the time) go home, things changed from that 
  point.   Before this the organizational evaluation of how the movement was 
  doing was in how the new initiations of new meditators were doing and also 
  in the numbers of mediators coming to residence courses.  In a meeting the 
  whole hierarchical order of the teaching organization was sorted, turned 
  out and replaced by 'teams' of teachers with Bevan, Neil and the Wilsons on 
  top and everyone else spun off. 

You got the spring of 77 and dissolving of the old orgs right. But Neil and the 
wilsons? in charge? I guess I didn't get those secret marching orders. I know 
the name, but Neil had nothing to do with our activities as guv teams of 4 in 
the field teaching the prep courses. The Wilsons, not sure who they are, 
however they surely were not someone the teams of guvs had anything to do with. 
(Were they  students at MIU in SB in 74 -- was Signe 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[maskedzebra]

And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]

RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have falsely 
and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears women's 
clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that you indeed 
have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to deny this in 
the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse you—if you 
insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of being a liar and 
a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.

What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?

This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.

Robin

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Barry,
 
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
 
 Hey Barry,
 
 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
 things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get 
 along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not 
 do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  
 Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and 
 accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and 
 you really let him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that 
 way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few 
 dustups after that because apparently some people here believe you were 
 sadistic and offensive in those posts.
 
 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem 
 to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was 
 just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me 
 now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find 
 offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask 
 that you be more like me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even 
 encouraging you by not asking you to change in this way,so I hope you 
 understand.
 
 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
 here is what I am asking:
 
 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have 
 any question about what this is the standard is Judy.
 
 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
 clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we 
 might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your 
 judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.
 
 3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
 to step in with a rolled up newspaper and tell you how bad you are.  This is 
 a right I have been given because you and I don't fight here.  The reason we 
 don't fight is not 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
   
Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you
manage to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse
than Mao,
   
   Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would
   correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
   my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
   people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so
   many more millions who attributed God-like status on him
   and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen
   Square.
  
  This was one of your points. Another, however, had to
  do with how both MMY and Mao staged their appearances
  before their followers specifically to evoke this
  subjective darshan experience that led their followers
  to confer God-like status on them.
  
  Other points involved personality traits the two of
  them had in common, such as hypocrisy (concerning their
  sexual dalliances, for example).
  
  So in fact it wasn't just about the unreliability of
  darshan experiences; you were comparing MMY and Mao as
  human beings.
  
  But you're quite right, Nabby is lying in one respect:
  You never said MMY was *worse* than Mao. Rather, you
  said MMY was a rather dim bulb compared to Mao.
  
  Actually, in context, maybe that *does* qualify as
  worse, and Nabby isn't lying after all.
  
  (You tried this sort of approach once before, Curtis,
  with regard to a different issue, and you fouled it up
  then too. You just aren't very good at it. You have
  trouble picking *parallels*, among other things.)
 
 So I never said that Maharishi was worse than Mao despite
 your attempt to twist it into that with a clumsy two step.
 It is obvious how Nabbie meant it and your attempts at
 obfuscation have failed.

Sheesh, Curtis, that was a jocular throwaway afterthought.

 And the upshot is for you to attempt to correct me about what
 point I was making

I *did* correct your claim about the point you had
been making. You attempted to limit it to the darshan
experiences of followers, whereas in fact you also
compared Mao and MMY as men. That is, of course, what
Nabby was referring to. So if he was being dishonest
about the comparison, so were you to claim you weren't
comparing them.

 rather than show some ethical disapproval
 for this blatant and offensive lie.

Remember what I said about the kind of gun Nabby uses?
Please read the parenthetical above again.

 Thanks for being predictable.  Now you can drop the superior
 ethical facade because you have just proven how fake and self-
 serving the act was.

Nice try, no cigar. As I said, you aren't very good
at this sort of approach.

And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
said about your appropriation of context. I think this
is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
rarely even try.

[FairfieldLife] The Hidden Hands in Redistricting

[raunchydog]

Their names suggest selfless dedication to democracy. Fair Districts Mass. 
Protect Your Vote. The Center for a Better New Jersey. And their stated goals 
are unarguable: In the partisan fight to redraw congressional districts, states 
should stick to the principle of one person, one vote.

But a ProPublica investigation has found that these groups and others are being 
quietly bankrolled by corporations, unions and other special interests. Their 
main interest in the once-a-decade political fight over redistricting is not to 
help voters in the communities they claim to represent but mainly to improve 
the prospects of their political allies or to harm their enemies.

read more:
http://www.propublica.org/article/hidden-hands-in-redistricting-corporations-special-interests

Video: The Redistricting Song

Packing, cracking, kidnapping, hijackiing
We decide how we decide
Bleach this district redraw the lines

If you want your party to win it all
But a whole lot of voters say no
Just redraw those lines at election time
http://www.propublica.org/article/video-the-redistricting-song

The National Popular Vote Bill, now at the half-way point would guarantee the 
Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the entire 
United States. The bill preserves the Electoral College, while ensuring that 
every vote in every state will matter in every presidential election. The 
National Popular Vote law has been enacted by states possessing 132 electoral 
votes — 49% of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate it. Write your 
congress critter:
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/index.php

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  If you really wanted to help Barry out,
 
 This may be the essence of our disagreement Judy.  This 
 is not a motive for me here.

Could this possibly be because Curtis has gotten
past the evolved man's burden mindset of TMers
and others who feel that it really IS their dharma
to help out those who believe or do something
different than they'd like them to by changing them?

Let's face it...Curtis is perceived as the mensch
he is BECAUSE he doesn't feel the need to change 
the people he interacts with, to make them more 
like him, and thus help them. 

That is a mindset so rare and refreshing that many
have responded to it favorably. Others, who find 
it a negative commentary on their need TO help 
those not as evolved as themselves, find it a bit 
challenging, and react to him as the threat to 
their carefully crafted self-images they see him 
as. Me, I just take him as what he appears to be,
which I see as returning the favor he does for
me and others on this forum.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

Ah, how fickle is true love. :-)

I merely am stating that the image of you writing your
posts to this forum while dressed in women's clothing
is not original with me. Someone else brought up this
image, I laughed at it at the time and forgot about it,
but then when your language got all drama queen-y with
Curtis, I thought it would be fun to trot out, just to
see what the reaction was, on all sides. The reaction
has exceeded my expectations.

BTW, guy, you *really* should look up what the term
drama queen means. It has nothing to do with one's
sexuality; it has to do with trying to turn everyday
minutiae into all-important, emotionally-inappropriate
opportunities for confrontation or emotional blackmail. 
You do that, and in spades. And you've done it since 
Day One on this forum.

What you do with your penis or lack of one has no 
interest for me whatsoever, and I doubt it has any
interest for Curtis, either. Are we clear? Now I 
leave you to emotionally blackmail Curtis as much
as you want, knowing that because he's *not* a 
drama queen, he can handle it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person and you really let him have it and said that you were not 
  going to treat him that way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded 
  and I guess you had a few dustups after that because apparently some people 
  here believe you were sadistic and offensive in those posts.
  
  ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I 
  seem to have a different opinion of him and since we 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote
 And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
 said about your appropriation of context. I think this
 is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
 any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
 to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
 but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
 can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
 rarely even try.



When it concerns a misrepresentation of my own POV I am not open to considering 
what point you think I was making. And if you are making a case for having a 
superior ability for understanding my context this would be a counterexample 
for that claim.  You have attempted to reframe the discussion about whether or 
not I was comparing Maharishi and Mao, which was never in question, of course 
I was.  But that comparison did not have the odious and practically insane 
suggestion that a pop guru was worse than the single greatest mass murder in 
history whose status in buttholery might only be challenged by Stalin.

So no, I am not open to the bullshit context you are attempting and that is not 
evidence of my lack of ability to understand another person's POV.  The 
question I have for you is why you thought you would get away with such a weak 
case while demonstrating the very lack of perceptiveness you are accusing me 
of?  You haven't demonstrated that you get my context, quite the opposite.  








 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:

 Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you
 manage to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse
 than Mao,

Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would
correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so
many more millions who attributed God-like status on him
and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen
Square.
   
   This was one of your points. Another, however, had to
   do with how both MMY and Mao staged their appearances
   before their followers specifically to evoke this
   subjective darshan experience that led their followers
   to confer God-like status on them.
   
   Other points involved personality traits the two of
   them had in common, such as hypocrisy (concerning their
   sexual dalliances, for example).
   
   So in fact it wasn't just about the unreliability of
   darshan experiences; you were comparing MMY and Mao as
   human beings.
   
   But you're quite right, Nabby is lying in one respect:
   You never said MMY was *worse* than Mao. Rather, you
   said MMY was a rather dim bulb compared to Mao.
   
   Actually, in context, maybe that *does* qualify as
   worse, and Nabby isn't lying after all.
   
   (You tried this sort of approach once before, Curtis,
   with regard to a different issue, and you fouled it up
   then too. You just aren't very good at it. You have
   trouble picking *parallels*, among other things.)
  
  So I never said that Maharishi was worse than Mao despite
  your attempt to twist it into that with a clumsy two step.
  It is obvious how Nabbie meant it and your attempts at
  obfuscation have failed.
 
 Sheesh, Curtis, that was a jocular throwaway afterthought.
 
  And the upshot is for you to attempt to correct me about what
  point I was making
 
 I *did* correct your claim about the point you had
 been making. You attempted to limit it to the darshan
 experiences of followers, whereas in fact you also
 compared Mao and MMY as men. That is, of course, what
 Nabby was referring to. So if he was being dishonest
 about the comparison, so were you to claim you weren't
 comparing them.
 
  rather than show some ethical disapproval
  for this blatant and offensive lie.
 
 Remember what I said about the kind of gun Nabby uses?
 Please read the parenthetical above again.
 
  Thanks for being predictable.  Now you can drop the superior
  ethical facade because you have just proven how fake and self-
  serving the act was.
 
 Nice try, no cigar. As I said, you aren't very good
 at this sort of approach.
 
 And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
 said about your appropriation of context. I think this
 is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
 any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
 to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
 but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
 can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
 rarely even try.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Yes, how fickle you are. 


This is so much fun; now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend reading all of 
Judy's posts and composing your bank shot responses to everyone. And while 
you're at it, please post the email you sent directly to me yesterday 
(unsolicited since its been 50 years since i hung out with eight year old's) 
that portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't believe for a 
minute).



PS: DO NOT email me directly, once was more than enough.




From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 8:57:34 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



Ah, how fickle is true love. :-)

I merely am stating that the image of you writing your
posts to this forum while dressed in women's clothing
is not original with me. Someone else brought up this
image, I laughed at it at the time and forgot about it,
but then when your language got all drama queen-y with
Curtis, I thought it would be fun to trot out, just to
see what the reaction was, on all sides. The reaction
has exceeded my expectations.

BTW, guy, you *really* should look up what the term
drama queen means. It has nothing to do with one's
sexuality; it has to do with trying to turn everyday
minutiae into all-important, emotionally-inappropriate
opportunities for confrontation or emotional blackmail. 
You do that, and in spades. And you've done it since 
Day One on this forum.

What you do with your penis or lack of one has no 
interest for me whatsoever, and I doubt it has any
interest for Curtis, either. Are we clear? Now I 
leave you to emotionally blackmail Curtis as much
as you want, knowing that because he's *not* a 
drama queen, he can handle it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Blues

[Bhairitu]

On 11/01/2011 04:10 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
 Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you manage to shriek 
 about MMM, the latest him being worse than Mao, your music simply SOUNDS like 
 Hillbillymusic, in my ears.

 http://tinyurl.com/67kzho3
 http://tinyurl.com/5s59bod

Musicologists believe that the blues originated from the Muslim call to 
prayer which uses a similar scale.

Hillbilly music was influenced by gospel music some of which has some 
roots in the blues.  Hillbilly or country western was popularized back 
in the 1940s when the ASCAP strike occurred and radio stations needed 
material that wasn't ASCAP and formed BMI.  BMI signed folk, blue grass 
and country groups.

Maybe you need bigger ears.  Funny thing is I have been noticing that 
the younger generation in general has smaller ears than a lot of older 
folks including baby boomers.   Don't know that means but it is an 
interesting phenomena. :-D

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

Robin,

Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
you read the full line on my post to Barry.

In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I began 
to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the more 
dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was never a 
putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides that could 
lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less.  

In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero.  
Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.

But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person and you really let him have it and said that you were not 
  going to treat him that way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded 
  and I guess you had a few dustups after that because apparently some people 
  here believe you were sadistic and offensive in those posts.
  
  ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I 
  seem to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I 
  was just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more 
  like me now and like Robin and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

My apologies, although you will note in retrospect that
1) I never named the source of the remark, and 2) never
said that it was the only such remark. (It wasn't...at
least one other person made a similar comment before I
echoed it.)

That said, I do apologize, and agree that any comment
you might have made was early on, before you got into
deeper conversations with the guy. And you are welcome
to your impressions of him; I just have different ones.

*That* said, and if there is any passive aggressive
intention involved on my part, it was to see how both 
Bob and Robin react to learning that the image of Robin 
sitting around in drag writing to FFL wasn't my invention? 

My intent was not to reveal any dickness on your part, 
but on theirs. As you and most people here probably know 
(but possibly not them, because they're both relative 
newbies), I've lived in towns that are 40% gay, worked 
for companies in which all employees other than myself
were gay, and am counted by my gay friends as one of
the least homophobic people they've ever met. What I
am is a sucker for metaphors that capture a particular
type of human behavior and a particular style of bad 
writing. I still believe that the posting-in-drag 
metaphor is right on. At least one person here agreed 
publicly, and a couple more did in email responses. 
But YMMV, and I don't want to push the metaphor on you 
or anyone else if you disagree with it. I just stick 
to my guns when it comes to my right to use it.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
  same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
  in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
  and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
  a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
  the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.
  
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 
 ME: 
 
 That was a bit of passive aggressive private conversation betrayal Barry, 
 what's up with that?
 
 The line you are referring to from a private email in the middle of July was: 
  But I had a good time uncovering his personal world like an anthropologist 
 and  I felt genuine affection and compassion for the guy.  It would not 
 surprise me in the least if on meeting him he was dressed as a woman. 
 
 It reflected the context of a lot of emphasis on Lady Gaga in our discussions 
 which could be taken as code, and I was genuinely wondering.  My amended view 
 of his orientation came as a result of personal emails.  And it was not meant 
 as a putdown, but as my perspective that I was dealing with a person who 
 lives very far outside the box.  And I still feel that way about Robin, 
 although not in this specific way.
 
 So I guess the gang has uncovered their cherished goal of getting me to 
 sincerely correct your behavior about something Barry.  I would appreciate if 
 you kept the contents of our private emails between us, and especially don't 
 want it used outside the intended context to make me look like a dick.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me look 
like a dick.
 

That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, maybe 
even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to worship you 
as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are like up to par 
with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of the minor ten 
Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. (Despite your 
consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)

   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 My apologies, 

Accepted


you will note in retrospect that
 1) I never named the source of the remark

The context was obvious and Robin immediate caught it.

and 2) never
 said that it was the only such remark. (It wasn't...at
 least one other person made a similar comment before I
 echoed it.)

Hey, you outted me and I had to explain myself about my own confusion about 
Robin in the beginning.  I was happier just rolling with my corrected view of 
him.  I suspect this is going to kill all the gay-ntastic joking that we have 
been doing, but oh well.


 
 That said, I do apologize, and agree that any comment
 you might have made was early on, before you got into
 deeper conversations with the guy. And you are welcome
 to your impressions of him; I just have different ones.
 
 *That* said, and if there is any passive aggressive
 intention involved on my part, it was to see how both 
 Bob and Robin react to learning that the image of Robin 
 sitting around in drag writing to FFL wasn't my invention? 
 
 My intent was not to reveal any dickness on your part, 
 but on theirs. As you and most people here probably know 
 (but possibly not them, because they're both relative 
 newbies), I've lived in towns that are 40% gay, worked 
 for companies in which all employees other than myself
 were gay, and am counted by my gay friends as one of
 the least homophobic people they've ever met. What I
 am is a sucker for metaphors that capture a particular
 type of human behavior and a particular style of bad 
 writing. I still believe that the posting-in-drag 
 metaphor is right on. At least one person here agreed 
 publicly, and a couple more did in email responses. 
 But YMMV, and I don't want to push the metaphor on you 
 or anyone else if you disagree with it. I just stick 
 to my guns when it comes to my right to use it.

The metaphor worked.  I just feel that it is unfair to expose things in private 
emails out of context. The context was loving toward Robin and it came off as 
judgmental without correction.  But I appreciate your owning it and would like 
to go back to our TM instructions:

Everything we learn in private, we keep private.  Not because the view I 
expressed about Robin to you is different from what I express to him, they were 
not.  But because you were using the metaphor in a very different way with 
different intentions.  

Thanks,now lets snuff out these joints, get out of this middle school bathroom 
and get out there for recess to see how Betty-May's bulbs are growing in that 
manly way we do that lets everyone know that we were in the same bathroom stall 
for the last 15 minutes doing only manly things.





 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
  
   Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
   same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
   in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
   and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
   a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
   the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.
   
   And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
   I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
   clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  
  ME: 
  
  That was a bit of passive aggressive private conversation betrayal Barry, 
  what's up with that?
  
  The line you are referring to from a private email in the middle of July 
  was:  But I had a good time uncovering his personal world like an 
  anthropologist and  I felt genuine affection and compassion for the guy.  
  It would not surprise me in the least if on meeting him he was dressed as a 
  woman. 
  
  It reflected the context of a lot of emphasis on Lady Gaga in our 
  discussions which could be taken as code, and I was genuinely wondering.  
  My amended view of his orientation came as a result of personal emails.  
  And it was not meant as a putdown, but as my perspective that I was dealing 
  with a person who lives very far outside the box.  And I still feel that 
  way about Robin, although not in this specific way.
  
  So I guess the gang has uncovered their cherished goal of getting me to 
  sincerely correct your behavior about something Barry.  I would appreciate 
  if you kept the contents of our private emails between us, and especially 
  don't want it used outside the intended context to make me look like a dick.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Kansas Rural Students Done Good

[jr_esq]

IMO, there is an advantage to having a relatively stable community, with a 
homogenious population group, and common cultural set of values.  This can be 
done in the rural areas of the country.

In cosmopolitan cities, however, this milieu cannot be maintained since there 
are other people from different cultural backgrounds.  Specifically, many of 
the kids live in bilingual homes, where some parents cannot even speak Eglish.  
As such, city schools have a unique set of challenges and do not perform as 
well in scholastic achievements.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:

 On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:37 PM, John jr_esq@... wrote:
 
  They're scoring on tests better than the world competition.
 
 
  http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tiny-rural-kansas-district-students-performing-global-competition-195446967.html#more-17478
 
 
 This is a shock?   There are pretty traditional schools in many farm states
 and little towns.  With schools which still teach Latin and Greek.   I went
 to a high school which hired the best teachers money could get.  I wondered
 if there was a law about teachers working within 60 miles of where they
 lived.  I didn't realize at the time that it was something special to have
 teachers who were scholars in Chemistry or Latin or English Lit, with
 masters to prove it and, incidentally, they had some education credits
 under their belt.   This was a working class school system mostly and the
 parents' and students' emphasis was on making something of ourselves.   And
 indeed we did.  When students graduated out of our college prep track we
 had our pick of colleges.  An amazing number of National Merit scholars,
 perfect SATs and on and on.   I later found out the paddling was the norm
 in the other surrounding school districts.  We never heard of such a
 thing.  Yeah, we cut up a little but a look from a teacher and it stopped.
 Then and there.  There's no need for diversity training, no need for touchy
 feely courses, no need for no child left behind, a laptop in ever student's
 hands.  We went on to prestigious school and just had books.   We developed
 our sense of self worth thru scholarship, athletics, community service and,
 yes, home ec.
 
 It's the attitude of the parents which matters most.  The parents instill
 the need for learning or the need to be litigious.  But we just can't or
 don't want to grok that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
 and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me 
 look like a dick.
  
 
 That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, maybe 
 even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to worship 
 you as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are like up to 
 par with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of the minor ten 
 Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. (Despite your 
 consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)

If you are asking if you can pour warm ghee on it, the answer is yes, but 
please make sure it isn't too hot.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Yes, how fickle you are. 
 
 This is so much fun; 

Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.

 ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
 why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
 reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
 responses to everyone. 

Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.

Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
writers.  :-)

Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Robin,
 
 Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
 you read the full line on my post to Barry.
 
 In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
 the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I 
 began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the 
 more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was 
 never a putdown on you to have thought that. 

Why would thinking someone gay, or transgender, be a put down? Its like we are 
living in Don Draper days, only the subhumans are no longer women or blacks but 
humans with a different orientation than than those making the slurs and put 
downs.   

And wearing womens' clothes? All of the women I see day to day are generally 
dressed in shorts and t-shirts and sandals in the summer, and jeans and 
non-gender specific shirts in the winter. Some do wear shoes that make them 
appear a bit taller, hiking boots, but they are not like pink hiking boots. Am 
I a cross dresser if I dress like that? (Next you are going to tell me I can't 
wear my powdered wig! As if our founding fathers were not balsey enough for 
you.)


 We both have dramatic sides that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I 
couldn't care less.  
 
 In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
 as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero. 
  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.
 
 But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
 beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
 
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
  email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
  of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
  about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
  listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
  it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
  
  RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
  falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
  women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
  you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
  deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I 
  accuse you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such 
  evidence—of being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
  
  What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about 
  me were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
  
  This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
  name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
  
  Robin
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   Barry,
   
   
   That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
   -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
   not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
   been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
   anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
   things should be on others is ethically deficient.
   
   Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
   The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
   especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
   who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
   movement.
   
   Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
   Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
   something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
   and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
   their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
   people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
   their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
   cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
   if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
   cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
   
   Hey Barry,
   
   Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
   some things that they don't like and found 

[FairfieldLife] Dutch Psychologist faked at least 30 papers

[Tom Pall]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/post/diederik-stapel-the-lying-dutchman/2011/11/01/gIQA86XOdM_blog.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Curtis,

I love you bro, but you need to keep up. As happens on FFL; the subject has 
moved on---from sexual orientation and homophobia---(although Barry's: There's 
a black guy in my kids school defense---is fun to watch), and we're now 
discussing hypocrisy or, if you prefer, duplicity (pick your poison). 



From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:15:49 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



Robin,

Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
you read the full line on my post to Barry.

In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I began 
to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the more 
dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was never a 
putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides that could 
lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less. 

In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as 
hetero.  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.

But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote
  And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
  said about your appropriation of context. I think this
  is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
  any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
  to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
  but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
  can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
  rarely even try.
 
 When it concerns a misrepresentation of my own POV I am not
 open to considering what point you think I was making. And
 if you are making a case for having a superior ability for 
 understanding my context this would be a counterexample for
 that claim.  You have attempted to reframe the discussion
 about whether or not I was comparing Maharishi and Mao,
 which was never in question, of course I was.

This is what you said to Nabby:

Usually I would
 correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
 my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
 people's subjective darshon experiences 

No of course I was about it. You were telling Nabby
that you *hadn't* been comparing MMY and Mao, that
your point about Mao had to do only with the darshan
experiences of his followers.

Nor did you contradict Nabby's assertion that you'd
said MMY was worse than Mao. You didn't even mention
it. *I* was the one who mentioned it, calling it a lie.
I even *documented* that it was a lie by quoting you to
the effect that MMY was a dim bulb by comparison with
Mao.

 But that comparison did not have the odious and practically
 insane suggestion that a pop guru was worse than the single 
 greatest mass murder in history whose status in buttholery
 might only be challenged by Stalin.

Right. That's a given, and I acknowledged and documented
it, as noted. Nabby's gun said Bang! and you freaked.

 So no, I am not open to the bullshit context you are
 attempting and that is not evidence of my lack of ability
 to understand another person's POV.

Well, yes, it is, because you've completely missed my
context in this post as well.

 The question I have for you is why you thought you would
 get away with such a weak case while demonstrating the very
 lack of perceptiveness you are accusing me of?  You haven't 
 demonstrated that you get my context, quite the opposite.

You've just proved my (and Robin's) point in spades, but
you're incapable of recognizing it.

You weren't even going after Nabby in your initial post,
BTW; you were going after me *via* Nabby. But you were so
intent on getting me that you lost focus and shot yourself
in the foot instead.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Kansas Rural Students Done Good

[Tom Pall]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:26 PM, jr_esq jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:

 IMO, there is an advantage to having a relatively stable community, with a
 homogenious population group, and common cultural set of values.  This can
 be done in the rural areas of the country.

 In cosmopolitan cities, however, this milieu cannot be maintained since
 there are other people from different cultural backgrounds.  Specifically,
 many of the kids live in bilingual homes, where some parents cannot even
 speak Eglish.  As such, city schools have a unique set of challenges and do
 not perform as well in scholastic achievements.



Except, unless the ethnic groups are Oriental.   Very high study ethic.
After dinner all the children gather around the dinner table and do their
homework.   Many of these student's parents can't speaking English.   It's
cultural, Dude.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 


Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to Curtis who may have 
the cajones to post it.




From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Yes, how fickle you are. 
 
 This is so much fun; 

Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.

 ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
 why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
 reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
 responses to everyone. 

Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.

Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
writers.  :-)

Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.


   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 
 
 Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to
 Curtis who may have the cajones to post it.

Wow. He just snipped this part of your post entirely:

And while you're at it, please post the email you sent
directly to me yesterday (unsolicited since its been 50
years since i hung out with eight year old's) that
portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't
believe for a minute).


 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued
 
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
 
  Yes, how fickle you are. 
  
  This is so much fun; 
 
 Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.
 
  ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
  why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
  reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
  responses to everyone. 
 
 Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
 Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
 such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
 in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
 But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.
 
 Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
 the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
 view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
 good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
 even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
 writers.  :-)
 
 Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
 oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.
 
 
   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote:
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
  and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me 
  look like a dick.
   
  
  That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, 
  maybe even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to 
  worship you as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are 
  like up to par with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of 
  the minor ten Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. 
  (Despite your consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)
 
 If you are asking if you can pour warm ghee on it, the answer is yes, but 
 please make sure it isn't too hot.
 

As fans of Janis (and who is not) used to offer her bottles of Southern Comfort 
that she would imbib in stage (loosens the vocal chords, even one of our famed 
sidha ex rockers said sipping before a concert was golden), I hear that some of 
your fans, often of the blonde and long legged part of the human genome, are 
prone to offer you jars of warm ghee on stage (well, sidewalk) hoping you will 
self anoint your self during or after your songs. Hope springs eternal for 
them. Just make sure no one is smoking withing 10 feet. That could be a 
disaster -- and could inspire a round of self-imolations among the OWS crowd, 
remenicent of Saigaon in 1963.  Your sacrafice might actually be the trigger of 
the Grand phase transition. (I know life would change for you.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[maskedzebra]

Curtis,

I don't mind being called gay. I am not gay, but so what? I detected from 
Barry's post the implication that he was in possession of 'the smoking gun'; 
that is, you had divulged to him that you were in possession of the forensics 
which would make of my gayness a fact.

If I were gay, and you had concrete evidence of this, no problem. Although I 
would be a hypocrite and a liar for using all that outrageous irony with Barry 
in response to this insinuation.

If Barry never intended to imply that he knows the real source of this 
characterization; that it was all just as you say, then I have misinterpreted 
the degree of specificity in Barry intent in that post. He acted—or so it 
seemed to me—as if he and you knew what 'really was the truth'.

So I apologize to Barry (and to yourself) for raising the notion of Iago here. 
I was wrong. And I accept your explanation entirely.

I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a woman. 
In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite remarkable. 
But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as straight as they 
come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.

You are an even more complex and versatile fellow than I thought. Imagine that: 
you all the while knew so much more about me than I assumed—from how you wrote 
to me—that you did. Curtis, he is up the moment; or at least he's better be.

Barry's negative response to me, I now take as very serious and intense. I 
thought before it was somewhat petty and mindless. But he is very sincere in 
his revulsion of Robin. I get this. And I think it very significant. And I am 
glad he has his supporters who write to him offline that they agree with his 
take on me. That's good to know.

For myself, writing here on FFL, I have only one aim: to understand myself 
better; to clarify my own philosophy; to learn from the tension I sense as 
others take positions that are in opposition to what I believe; and to tease 
out reality (in the form of these other posts—most notably your own) such that 
I can use these cues to somehow get to know where my destiny is taking me.

My motives in all that I have written on FFL are honest and without prejudice.

I find it simply nonplussing that someone (like Barry, and a few others 
evidently) can misconstrue this and declare: You are a fucking pain in the neck 
(I switched anatomically there, for obvious reasons), Robin. 

I don't doubt this is Barry's experience; it is just that it seems so wide of 
the mark.

It might just be happening for me to shut up for awhile after this.

I appreciate your explaining yourself. And of course I exonerate you.

Robin 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Robin,
 
 Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
 you read the full line on my post to Barry.
 
 In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
 the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I 
 began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the 
 more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was 
 never a putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides 
 that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less.  
 
 In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
 as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero. 
  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.
 
 But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
 beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
 
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
  email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
  of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
  about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
  listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
  it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
  
  RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
  falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
  women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
  you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
  deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I 
  accuse you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such 
  evidence—of being a liar and a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[whynotnow7]

The movement belongs to those who move. Those who were stuck on the idea that 
the movement and the TMO were ONLY about the 7-step program were, well, stuck. 
I think M and TM were always a moving target about gateways to consciousness 
and purifying collective consciousness, via a lot of different avenues.

Exactly. I was initiated in late 75, then in 78 I worked for the Movement in 
LManor, for $5 per month and an unheated cabin, just after it became a men's 
only facility, working in the kitchen and the A of E press for a year. We were 
hosting Guv training courses with the flying technique then too - lots of 
whooping and hollering! The staff meditators went on residence courses one 
weekend a month and normally had a 2x2 daily schedule, but the siddhis were 
taught in blocks then, and I wasn't selected for the first block. 

Came back to work for the Movement in mid 79 to mid 80, about 100 miles east of 
Kansas City, MO, building a 30 room residence course and flying hall facility, 
farming 14 acres of organic strawberries, and tending a 10 acre apple orchard 
and pressing facility next door. Got the Siddhis as work/study, with a $25/mo. 
stipend, living out of an unheated garage, and then a trailer. Didn't pay any 
taxes that year either...:-) 

Then one more time around 82, I went to work for the Missouri facility again, 
decided I wanted to be a teacher, applied for TTC, then took a much closer look 
at what the Movement was, and how different it was from where I wanted to be, 
so I left, and that was that. 

I continued to do the TM-Sid program for another 12 years, went on my last 
course in the early 90's - that big DC one, then did TM until about March of 
this year, when the practice just fell off and wasn't missed (though always 
available). 

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote:
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
  
   
   
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote:
   
So you keep talking about Maharishi in great analysis and detail to 
keep from thinking about how Lenz fucked up your head and heart? 

That's what it looks like. Freddy was exceptionally gifted and 
insecure. Probably suffering parental rejection, so he got together a 
few of you and made sure HE was the boss, HE was the Guru. You kissed 
HIS butt, but you get the picture- you lived it. Now instead of coming 
to grips with it, you deflect everything about Lenz onto Maharishi. 

Free clue: Grow a pair and start living in the present and/or see a 
therapist about the Lenz shit and clear yourself out. Its kind of 
pathetic to see you in this state, all blind to it and misguidedly 
throwing all of your pain on Maharishi. After all, Lenz was the 
mentally ill one, the crazy one, the one you can't grow past even now.  
  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote:

 This is not a counter rebuttal, simply another view, a point for 
 further discussion and examination. 
 
 The tipping point was when a portion (I think it was 11.73% but 
 others may quibble on this)of the full time community -- and some 
 ardent part-timers, kept clung to the notion that M. and his TMOs 
 were all about, only about, the seven step program for teaching 20 
 min 2x / day. 
 
 A parallel is Apple and Steve Jobs.  When he went more digital 
 (i-tunes, i-phone) and creating superb customer experiences (Apple 
 stores) etc, many of the faithful said, Huh, what does this have to 
 do with selling Macs and What possible effect can a company with 3% 
 market share have on digital music. Steve's vision was that Apple 
 was a digital gateway company (or something along those lines with 
 a core emphasis on superb design.
 
 Apple would not be the company with the largest market capitalization 
 in the world (subject to check) and Steve Jobs would not be revered 
 as the CEO of the decade(s), if he limited his vision to selling 
 Macs.   
 
 M. and his TMOs, in my view, were / are about being a Consciousness 
 gateway org -- not limited to 20 min 2x, but having 50 product lines 
 that enable Consciousness to shine in all parts of a persons life. 
 Yet many whined, when will we get OUR old TMO back, 20 min 2x. 
 When will M come to his senses and do what he is supposed to do, 
 teach TM.
 
  
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
 
  The sense of near-desperation with which some on this forum are 
  hoping
  that Oprah is the new Merv and that TM is finally on the upswing 
  again
  left me thinking about its past, and trying to pinpoint where it all
  went wrong. Many have speculated on this forum about what that 
  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote
   And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
   said about your appropriation of context. I think this
   is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
   any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
   to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
   but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
   can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
   rarely even try.
  
  When it concerns a misrepresentation of my own POV I am not
  open to considering what point you think I was making. And
  if you are making a case for having a superior ability for 
  understanding my context this would be a counterexample for
  that claim.  You have attempted to reframe the discussion
  about whether or not I was comparing Maharishi and Mao,
  which was never in question, of course I was.
 
 This is what you said to Nabby:
 
 Usually I would
  correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
  my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
  people's subjective darshon experiences 
 
 No of course I was about it. You were telling Nabby
 that you *hadn't* been comparing MMY and Mao, that
 your point about Mao had to do only with the darshan
 experiences of his followers.

Wow you really can't get out of your own context to understand my point can 
you?  That was my central point about Mao and of course it is a comparison, but 
not in the way Nabbie was implying. There was no comparison I have ever made 
that could be summed up in the misleading phrase worse than Mao.

And here is where I have a bit of an upper hand since I am the one inhabiting 
my own skull and know what it is I mean by what I express here.  The darshon 
point is key to how I view the world.  The other comparisons of lifestyle are 
minor points of how alpha chimps abuse power even if they have holiness in 
their self appointed name. You are trying to pull a trees for the forest Judy 
game and it is not going to work concerning the meaning of my own points.

 
 Nor did you contradict Nabby's assertion that you'd
 said MMY was worse than Mao. You didn't even mention
 it. *I* was the one who mentioned it, calling it a lie.
 I even *documented* that it was a lie by quoting you to
 the effect that MMY was a dim bulb by comparison with
 Mao.
 
  But that comparison did not have the odious and practically
  insane suggestion that a pop guru was worse than the single 
  greatest mass murder in history whose status in buttholery
  might only be challenged by Stalin.
 
 Right. That's a given, and I acknowledged and documented
 it, as noted. Nabby's gun said Bang! and you freaked.

Ah the use of spin is so delightful, isn't it? Freaked' did I?

 
  So no, I am not open to the bullshit context you are
  attempting and that is not evidence of my lack of ability
  to understand another person's POV.
 
 Well, yes, it is, because you've completely missed my
 context in this post as well.

As have you Judy.  It is the nature of having different POVs and is not a 
special case of you being better at it than I am.

 
  The question I have for you is why you thought you would
  get away with such a weak case while demonstrating the very
  lack of perceptiveness you are accusing me of?  You haven't 
  demonstrated that you get my context, quite the opposite.
 
 You've just proved my (and Robin's) point in spades, but
 you're incapable of recognizing it.
 
 You weren't even going after Nabby in your initial post,
 BTW; you were going after me *via* Nabby. But you were so
 intent on getting me that you lost focus and shot yourself
 in the foot instead.

Funny how you missed how I cleverly did correct Nabbie in my response while 
simultaneously exposing your double standards for correcting blatant lies about 
a person.  But I forgive you because I know you are very good at taking another 
person's perspective here.

BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby labeled a bang flag 
on a toy gun, and I will delight in pointing our whether it causes you to get 
freaked about it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
other people's POV here. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[whynotnow7]

Barry tried the same thing with me, the unsolicited email on the side. I didn't 
go for it either. I wonder how many others he's done this to?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
 
  Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 
  
  Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to
  Curtis who may have the cajones to post it.
 
 Wow. He just snipped this part of your post entirely:
 
 And while you're at it, please post the email you sent
 directly to me yesterday (unsolicited since its been 50
 years since i hung out with eight year old's) that
 portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't
 believe for a minute).
 
 
  
  From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
  Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued
  
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
  
   Yes, how fickle you are. 
   
   This is so much fun; 
  
  Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.
  
   ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
   why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
   reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
   responses to everyone. 
  
  Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
  Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
  such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
  in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
  But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.
  
  Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
  the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
  view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
  good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
  even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
  writers.  :-)
  
  Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
  oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.
  
  
    
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
 that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a 
 woman. In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite 
 remarkable. But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as 
 straight as they come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.

I appreciate that you get the spirit of the speculation.  It was not even about 
your orientation but that I considered you such a unique human with such an 
open ability to dramatically reveal your own uniqueness here, that lead to 
express it that way.  It was literally true that it would not have surprised me 
or made me miss a beat if you had shown up in a woman's dress or a full gorilla 
suit or painted blue.  You are an original intelligence here.  And it is rare 
that I find someone as willing to go with the metaphorical flow as we have in 
our posts.  

Thanks for understanding my intention.  We can revisit the topic of your POV 
concerning my ability to see your POV I hope.  I'll give it some thought, and 
perhaps you can give me some assistance in seeing what you meant.  I know for 
sure that if I am to understand this point it will be from your friendly 
perspective.






 Curtis,
 
 I don't mind being called gay. I am not gay, but so what? I detected from 
 Barry's post the implication that he was in possession of 'the smoking gun'; 
 that is, you had divulged to him that you were in possession of the forensics 
 which would make of my gayness a fact.
 
 If I were gay, and you had concrete evidence of this, no problem. Although I 
 would be a hypocrite and a liar for using all that outrageous irony with 
 Barry in response to this insinuation.
 
 If Barry never intended to imply that he knows the real source of this 
 characterization; that it was all just as you say, then I have misinterpreted 
 the degree of specificity in Barry intent in that post. He acted—or so it 
 seemed to me—as if he and you knew what 'really was the truth'.
 
 So I apologize to Barry (and to yourself) for raising the notion of Iago 
 here. I was wrong. And I accept your explanation entirely.
 
 I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
 that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a 
 woman. In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite 
 remarkable. But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as 
 straight as they come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.
 
 You are an even more complex and versatile fellow than I thought. Imagine 
 that: you all the while knew so much more about me than I assumed—from how 
 you wrote to me—that you did. Curtis, he is up the moment; or at least he's 
 better be.
 
 Barry's negative response to me, I now take as very serious and intense. I 
 thought before it was somewhat petty and mindless. But he is very sincere in 
 his revulsion of Robin. I get this. And I think it very significant. And I am 
 glad he has his supporters who write to him offline that they agree with his 
 take on me. That's good to know.
 
 For myself, writing here on FFL, I have only one aim: to understand myself 
 better; to clarify my own philosophy; to learn from the tension I sense as 
 others take positions that are in opposition to what I believe; and to tease 
 out reality (in the form of these other posts—most notably your own) such 
 that I can use these cues to somehow get to know where my destiny is taking 
 me.
 
 My motives in all that I have written on FFL are honest and without prejudice.
 
 I find it simply nonplussing that someone (like Barry, and a few others 
 evidently) can misconstrue this and declare: You are a fucking pain in the 
 neck (I switched anatomically there, for obvious reasons), Robin. 
 
 I don't doubt this is Barry's experience; it is just that it seems so wide of 
 the mark.
 
 It might just be happening for me to shut up for awhile after this.
 
 I appreciate your explaining yourself. And of course I exonerate you.
 
 Robin 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Robin,
  
  Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further 
  once you read the full line on my post to Barry.
  
  In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I 
  believed the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over 
  time I began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other 
  outside the more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  
  But it was never a putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have 
  dramatic sides that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't 
  care less.  
  
  In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant 
  it as a gay slur, he calls Jim that 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
 pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
 it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
 other people's POV here. 

BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
experiment, and now they are free to react as 
they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 

It's been fun chumming the waters a little
this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.

When it comes to the people I have taken bang
flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
anyone of anything. They are free to continue
to try to make any case against me they wish, 
if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)

I really am hoping to step away from the news-
group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
there is little said here that interests me 
intellectually all that much these days; I just
can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
But there's really no challenge even in that
any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
pushed. Better I should do like the more
sensible posters here and just lay low until
and if something is said that I actually 
find interesting.

Or not. We'll see...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Conversation between Curtis Robin

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 snip
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
  snip
And I am sure, at least in the case of myself, Curtis
would admit this to you. (But I have a hunch he wants
to cover off for Barry, and he will only tacitly
indicate that I am not far wrong in what I have said.)
   
   Bingo. He already did, actually, in a post chiding
   Bhairitu for his inability to appreciate your dialogue:
  
  I was chiding him for equating my interest in long
  discussions with a pathology.  I was in no way chiding
  him for being unable to appreciate our dialogue.
 
 Um, OK. You chided him for saying nasty things
 about you because he couldn't get beyond his
 personal preferences, i.e., was unable to
 appreciate your dialogue.

ME:  I'll just keep putting the snipped line out as long as you keep 
misrepresenting this conversation.

Me clarifying to verify that her intentions are dishonest in this exchange:

Isn't it good enough that you just don't dig what we are serving up? Not your 
cup of tea.

He didn't have to accuse me of pathology because my exchange with Robin was not 
his cup of tea.  I don't care if now one buy Robin reads our exchanges but was 
requesting that he not use the exchanges that he doesn't prefer as evidence of 
me being neurotic.  I get along fine with Bhairitu so I felt like my objection 
would be received how I meant it.

But you knew all this.  I guess we don't share the same ethical standards.  Or 
would you like to make a case that you aren't too good at analyzing all this 
words stuff?


 
 So if he wasn't able to appreciate your dialogue,
 he should have kept his mouth shut, right?


ME: I didn't appreciate his accusation.  I was responding.

 
 Wait. What would it have looked like, I wonder, 
 what would he have said, if he *could* get beyond
 his personal preferences? What might he have said
 in that case, instead of equating your interest
 in long discussions with a pathology?
 
 I get it now. He might have said you were a saint--
 the Mother Teresa of the Internet, for example--
 while equating *Robin's* interest in long discussions
 with a pathology, one for which you had great
 compassion, to provide these oh-so-needy people
 with the attention that they so desperately seek.
 
 As long as it's Robin who is said to have an
 almost pathological need to use as many words as
 humanly possible to convince others of that
 [self-]importance, all while coming up with a
 near-absolute dearth of creative ideas (or even
 original ideas), and you're feigning interest
 in what he says out of your saintly commitment
 to selfless service, that's fine with you.

ME: Robin is defending himself with Barry just fine.  Are you now advocating 
that I now enter Robin's battle with Barry like you wanted me to do with your 
own?  Cuz he isn't a good worder, and can't pull it together for himself 
perhaps?

 
 That's what getting beyond personal preferences
 might look like, as far as you're concerned.
 
 Right?

ME: Hi Sour Plum. Haven't seen you lately. 

 
 I've misjudged you, Curtis. I thought that by
 chiding Bhairitu, you were sending a subtle signal
 to Barry that he too ought to get beyond his
 personal preferences. I should have known better.
 
  I don't expect anyone to give a shit about our
  discussion. I would prefer that people didn't try
  to use it as evidence that I have an overstimulated
  intellect or too much vatta which he went on to
  describe as in modern terms as  neurotic.
 
 Right. Fine for somebody to try to use your
 discussion with Robin as evidence that *Robin*
 is neurotic, as long as you're portrayed as so
 saintly as to admire the running sores of the
 lepers with whom you compassionately engage.

ME: Oh the busy dealings of the Sour Plum.  Not enough issues of her own to 
fix.  So very busy is her body.  

ME:Oh here it is, out of context and so forlorn. The clarifying section that 
you have not responded to.  I'm sure you will here... 

 
  But of course you knew this which is why you
  selectively snipped the sentence before your quote
  when I made that clear:
  
  Isn't it good enough that you just don't dig what
  we are serving up? Not your cup of tea.
 
 My apologies. I genuinely did not understand
 the difference you perceived between what Barry
 said (dumping on Robin and exalting you) and what
 Bhairitu said (dumping on both of you). I still
 don't quite get, however, why the sentence I
 snipped should have conveyed that difference.

ME:  Neither Barry nor I believe I am a saint, it was parody poking fun, using 
me as a device.  He was actually taking a shot at Robin which Robin handled 
nicely himself without the meddling of any of us.  My response was to up the 
ante on satire in another post which made my 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Ravi Yogi]

Ok hope the dust settled, let's remember Barry's suggestions to act like mature 
adults. 

Hold it, huh? what? Barry started all this? OMG !!!

Oops.., never mind please ignore me.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote
And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
said about your appropriation of context. I think this
is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
rarely even try.
   
   When it concerns a misrepresentation of my own POV I am not
   open to considering what point you think I was making. And
   if you are making a case for having a superior ability for 
   understanding my context this would be a counterexample for
   that claim.  You have attempted to reframe the discussion
   about whether or not I was comparing Maharishi and Mao,
   which was never in question, of course I was.
  
  This is what you said to Nabby:
  
  Usually I would
   correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
   my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
   people's subjective darshon experiences 
  
  No of course I was about it. You were telling Nabby
  that you *hadn't* been comparing MMY and Mao, that
  your point about Mao had to do only with the darshan
  experiences of his followers.
 
 Wow you really can't get out of your own context to
 understand my point can you?  That was my central point
 about Mao and of course it is a comparison, but not in
 the way Nabbie was implying. There was no comparison I
 have ever made that could be summed up in the misleading
 phrase worse than Mao.

Yes, as I've acknowledged how many times now, including
in my original response, where I *documented* that you
hadn't said MMY was worse than Mao?

You miss the context *even when it's right in front
of your nose*, even when you *quote* it:

snip
  Nor did you contradict Nabby's assertion that you'd
  said MMY was worse than Mao. You didn't even mention
  it. *I* was the one who mentioned it, calling it a lie.
  I even *documented* that it was a lie by quoting you to
  the effect that MMY was a dim bulb by comparison with
  Mao.
  
   But that comparison did not have the odious and practically
   insane suggestion that a pop guru was worse than the single 
   greatest mass murder in history whose status in buttholery
   might only be challenged by Stalin.
  
  Right. That's a given, and I acknowledged and documented
  it, as noted. Nabby's gun said Bang! and you freaked.
 
 Ah the use of spin is so delightful, isn't it? Freaked' did I?

Says Curtis, focusing on one word and completely missing
the context of what I wrote. Except in this case I think
it's just a dance move to *avoid* the context.

   So no, I am not open to the bullshit context you are
   attempting and that is not evidence of my lack of ability
   to understand another person's POV.
  
  Well, yes, it is, because you've completely missed my
  context in this post as well.
 
 As have you Judy.  It is the nature of having different POVs
 and is not a special case of you being better at it than I am.

You are more oblivious to other people's contexts than
anyone else on FFL.

I got your context. That's what I was *tweaking*, doncha
know.

   The question I have for you is why you thought you would
   get away with such a weak case while demonstrating the very
   lack of perceptiveness you are accusing me of?  You haven't 
   demonstrated that you get my context, quite the opposite.
  
  You've just proved my (and Robin's) point in spades, but
  you're incapable of recognizing it.
  
  You weren't even going after Nabby in your initial post,
  BTW; you were going after me *via* Nabby. But you were so
  intent on getting me that you lost focus and shot yourself
  in the foot instead.
 
 Funny how you missed how I cleverly did correct Nabbie in
 my response while simultaneously exposing your double
 standards for correcting blatant lies about a person.

And because you were trying to use Nabby to get at me,
you missed both shots.

 But I forgive you because I know you are very good at taking 
 another person's perspective here.
 
 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun

Which label would, of course, in most if not all cases be
thoroughly dishonest. No surprise there; you're blind to
Barry's context as well.

(BTW, did you notice how he's claiming to have done the
setup for this week's experiment? Did he explain to you
in private beforehand what he was going to do, and you've
just been playing along? Or did you get sucked up in it
unwittingly as he pulled your strings? Love to know what
he said to Bob in private email that 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:
 
 You are more oblivious to other people's contexts than
 anyone else on FFL.

I don't believe my history of getting to know people here supports this claim 
Judy.  I think you are just trying to say something mean and got a little 
desperate about it.










 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote
 And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
 said about your appropriation of context. I think this
 is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
 any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
 to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
 but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
 can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
 rarely even try.

When it concerns a misrepresentation of my own POV I am not
open to considering what point you think I was making. And
if you are making a case for having a superior ability for 
understanding my context this would be a counterexample for
that claim.  You have attempted to reframe the discussion
about whether or not I was comparing Maharishi and Mao,
which was never in question, of course I was.
   
   This is what you said to Nabby:
   
   Usually I would
correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
people's subjective darshon experiences 
   
   No of course I was about it. You were telling Nabby
   that you *hadn't* been comparing MMY and Mao, that
   your point about Mao had to do only with the darshan
   experiences of his followers.
  
  Wow you really can't get out of your own context to
  understand my point can you?  That was my central point
  about Mao and of course it is a comparison, but not in
  the way Nabbie was implying. There was no comparison I
  have ever made that could be summed up in the misleading
  phrase worse than Mao.
 
 Yes, as I've acknowledged how many times now, including
 in my original response, where I *documented* that you
 hadn't said MMY was worse than Mao?
 
 You miss the context *even when it's right in front
 of your nose*, even when you *quote* it:
 
 snip
   Nor did you contradict Nabby's assertion that you'd
   said MMY was worse than Mao. You didn't even mention
   it. *I* was the one who mentioned it, calling it a lie.
   I even *documented* that it was a lie by quoting you to
   the effect that MMY was a dim bulb by comparison with
   Mao.
   
But that comparison did not have the odious and practically
insane suggestion that a pop guru was worse than the single 
greatest mass murder in history whose status in buttholery
might only be challenged by Stalin.
   
   Right. That's a given, and I acknowledged and documented
   it, as noted. Nabby's gun said Bang! and you freaked.
  
  Ah the use of spin is so delightful, isn't it? Freaked' did I?
 
 Says Curtis, focusing on one word and completely missing
 the context of what I wrote. Except in this case I think
 it's just a dance move to *avoid* the context.
 
So no, I am not open to the bullshit context you are
attempting and that is not evidence of my lack of ability
to understand another person's POV.
   
   Well, yes, it is, because you've completely missed my
   context in this post as well.
  
  As have you Judy.  It is the nature of having different POVs
  and is not a special case of you being better at it than I am.
 
 You are more oblivious to other people's contexts than
 anyone else on FFL.
 
 I got your context. That's what I was *tweaking*, doncha
 know.
 
The question I have for you is why you thought you would
get away with such a weak case while demonstrating the very
lack of perceptiveness you are accusing me of?  You haven't 
demonstrated that you get my context, quite the opposite.
   
   You've just proved my (and Robin's) point in spades, but
   you're incapable of recognizing it.
   
   You weren't even going after Nabby in your initial post,
   BTW; you were going after me *via* Nabby. But you were so
   intent on getting me that you lost focus and shot yourself
   in the foot instead.
  
  Funny how you missed how I cleverly did correct Nabbie in
  my response while simultaneously exposing your double
  standards for correcting blatant lies about a person.
 
 And because you were trying to use Nabby to get at me,
 you missed both shots.
 
  But I forgive you because I know you are very good at taking 
  another person's perspective here.
  
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun
 
 Which label would, of 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[Tom Pall]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:03 PM, whynotnow7 whynotn...@yahoo.com wrote:

 The movement belongs to those who move. Those who were stuck on the idea
 that the movement and the TMO were ONLY about the 7-step program were,
 well, stuck. I think M and TM were always a moving target about gateways to
 consciousness and purifying collective consciousness, via a lot of
 different avenues.

 Exactly. I was initiated in late 75, then in 78 I worked for the Movement
 in LManor, for $5 per month and an unheated cabin, just after it became a
 men's only facility, working in the kitchen and the A of E press for a
 year. We were hosting Guv training courses with the flying technique then
 too - lots of whooping and hollering! The staff meditators went on
 residence courses one weekend a month and normally had a 2x2 daily
 schedule, but the siddhis were taught in blocks then, and I wasn't selected
 for the first block.

 Came back to work for the Movement in mid 79 to mid 80, about 100 miles
 east of Kansas City, MO, building a 30 room residence course and flying
 hall facility, farming 14 acres of organic strawberries, and tending a 10
 acre apple orchard and pressing facility next door. Got the Siddhis as
 work/study, with a $25/mo. stipend, living out of an unheated garage, and
 then a trailer. Didn't pay any taxes that year either...:-)

 Then one more time around 82, I went to work for the Missouri facility
 again, decided I wanted to be a teacher, applied for TTC, then took a much
 closer look at what the Movement was, and how different it was from where I
 wanted to be, so I left, and that was that.

 I continued to do the TM-Sid program for another 12 years, went on my last
 course in the early 90's - that big DC one, then did TM until about March
 of this year, when the practice just fell off and wasn't missed (though
 always available).



I worked on the Houston (Navasota, Grimes County) capital for room and
board.  And yes, shared an unheated cabin.   Barhroom was the bushes
outside.  Yes, it gets cold in Texas during the Winter.Maharishi was
absolutely right.  The movement belongs to those who move large quantities
of cash across national borders, undetected.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote:

 On 11/01/2011 04:10 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
  Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you manage to shriek 
  about MMM, the latest him being worse than Mao, your music simply SOUNDS 
  like Hillbillymusic, in my ears.
 
  http://tinyurl.com/67kzho3

http://tinyurl.com/5s59bod

 
 Musicologists believe that the blues originated from the Muslim call to 
 prayer which uses a similar scale.
 
 Hillbilly music was influenced by gospel music some of which has some 
 roots in the blues.  Hillbilly or country western was popularized back 
 in the 1940s when the ASCAP strike occurred and radio stations needed 
 material that wasn't ASCAP and formed BMI.  BMI signed folk, blue grass 
 and country groups.
 
 Maybe you need bigger ears.  Funny thing is I have been noticing that 
 the younger generation in general has smaller ears than a lot of older 
 folks including baby boomers.   Don't know that means but it is an 
 interesting phenomena. :-D



Interesting observation. 

Perhaps I simply don't favor how curtis sings very much, it reminds me of some 
greadful hillbillies I once heard. And perhaps, when he goes on and on how 
terrible Maharishi was or the TMO is it reminds me of those gruesome sounds.

Or call med prejudiced :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[whynotnow7]

Ha-ha! It was always pretty rustic.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:

 On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:03 PM, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote:
 
  The movement belongs to those who move. Those who were stuck on the idea
  that the movement and the TMO were ONLY about the 7-step program were,
  well, stuck. I think M and TM were always a moving target about gateways to
  consciousness and purifying collective consciousness, via a lot of
  different avenues.
 
  Exactly. I was initiated in late 75, then in 78 I worked for the Movement
  in LManor, for $5 per month and an unheated cabin, just after it became a
  men's only facility, working in the kitchen and the A of E press for a
  year. We were hosting Guv training courses with the flying technique then
  too - lots of whooping and hollering! The staff meditators went on
  residence courses one weekend a month and normally had a 2x2 daily
  schedule, but the siddhis were taught in blocks then, and I wasn't selected
  for the first block.
 
  Came back to work for the Movement in mid 79 to mid 80, about 100 miles
  east of Kansas City, MO, building a 30 room residence course and flying
  hall facility, farming 14 acres of organic strawberries, and tending a 10
  acre apple orchard and pressing facility next door. Got the Siddhis as
  work/study, with a $25/mo. stipend, living out of an unheated garage, and
  then a trailer. Didn't pay any taxes that year either...:-)
 
  Then one more time around 82, I went to work for the Missouri facility
  again, decided I wanted to be a teacher, applied for TTC, then took a much
  closer look at what the Movement was, and how different it was from where I
  wanted to be, so I left, and that was that.
 
  I continued to do the TM-Sid program for another 12 years, went on my last
  course in the early 90's - that big DC one, then did TM until about March
  of this year, when the practice just fell off and wasn't missed (though
  always available).
 
 
 
 I worked on the Houston (Navasota, Grimes County) capital for room and
 board.  And yes, shared an unheated cabin.   Barhroom was the bushes
 outside.  Yes, it gets cold in Texas during the Winter.Maharishi was
 absolutely right.  The movement belongs to those who move large quantities
 of cash across national borders, undetected.

[FairfieldLife] worse than Mao

[Yifu]

Stalin maybe, Hitler too; all variants on the theme of evil, so take your pick. 
But in terms of numbers, especially as a percentage of the world's population: 
first would be the Mongol invasion(s).

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/5/48012.jpg

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Bob Price]

Ravi,



Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 


That was easy.



From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
 pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
 it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
 other people's POV here. 

BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
experiment, and now they are free to react as 
they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 

It's been fun chumming the waters a little
this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.

When it comes to the people I have taken bang
flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
anyone of anything. They are free to continue
to try to make any case against me they wish, 
if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)

I really am hoping to step away from the news-
group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
there is little said here that interests me 
intellectually all that much these days; I just
can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
But there's really no challenge even in that
any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
pushed. Better I should do like the more
sensible posters here and just lay low until
and if something is said that I actually 
find interesting.

Or not. We'll see...


   

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:

 I worked on the Houston (Navasota, Grimes County) capital for 
 room and board. And yes, shared an unheated cabin. Barhroom 
 was the bushes outside. Yes, it gets cold in Texas during the 
 Winter. Maharishi was absolutely right.  The movement belongs 
 to those who move large quantities of cash across national 
 borders, undetected.

I never went to any of the more modern TM hovels.
I used to teach a lot of residence courses at 
Soboba (I think the name was) in southern CA,
and attended many courses at Cobb Mountain in
northern CA. The former didn't really have much
personality, but the latter did. It had been
some kind of camp or retreat facility before
the TMO acquired it, and I found it charming,
with its old clapboard cottages and rustic
camp-era dining/meeting hall. Plus, the fact
that most everyone was in a separate cottage
made it easier to fool around on ATR courses. :-)

The worst facility experience I had, in retro-
spect, was probably at Poland Springs, ME. I got
to see the balance sheets for that one after the
course was over. The TMO paid something like $15
per night per participant for the room, and was
supposed to pay something like $10 per person per 
day for food. They charged us a great deal more 
than that for the rooms, and actually (according 
to the financial records for the course) spent 
less than $4 per person per day on food. Half of 
the fruit served to us at meals was rotten.

In Europe most facilities were acceptable, because
they were owned (and thus maintained) by someone
other than the TMO. The minute they started buy-
ing their own places, however, all concept of
maintenance or improvement went in the toilet
and they allowed the places to slide into dis-
repair and in some cases public health hazard
status. And they could do this because they knew
that no one would ever complain; the course par-
ticipants were too spaced out and guru-whipped 
to even *consider* complaining.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bhairitu]

I probably look at the show a little differently than you though they 
are definitely lampooning zealousness.  Dern would have her experience 
from TM and probably Lynch's zealousness while Mike White has a whole 
different angle.  His dad was a closet gay writer for people like Pat 
Robertson and so probably had Jayzuz thrust down his throat.  Then there 
is the lampooning of corporate America. Even the kayaking thing is a bit 
lampooning and the MC Gainey (Lost) character as a former TV show 
writer ripping Hollywood.  And of course corporate America is or was 
very into these kayaking things as team building events.  Never 
participated in one though the company would have some.  It would have 
been a good way to kill myself. ;-)

And definitely Amy's mom and ex have issues so it is fair to delve into 
those too.  Not to mention her co-workers.

Problem is that it is not a ha-ha funny show.  That may limit it to 
one season.   OTOH, Hung usually delivers some yucks and this last 
episode had some good ones.

As for much of anyone seeing these series outside of an HBO subscription 
or an illegal torrent they have to wait until dumb ass Time-Warner 
releases them to disc or preferably streaming.  Today there is an 
article about declining revenue at Time-Warner's home video division at 
News.com:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20128929-261/time-warners-home-video-revenue-plunges

For some reason their execs overvalue their products.  When Hollywood 
Video was still around he told me that Warner did not allow them to sell 
the HBO series at the end of a rental run but had to send them back.  
I'm even sure they were allowed to sell Warner DVDs due to the revenue 
sharing agreement.  Fact is a lot of other studios don't bother with 
such nonsense.

Earlier this year when the 1930's film Gabriel Over the White House 
was mentioned on Roger Ebert's At the Movies it was not available from 
Netflix or anywhere for that matter.  I was available for $20 as a 
one-off DVD from Warner Classics.  They have  WMV streaming version for 
$15 which you own in that you can play it any time you want. But I 
couldn't play it on my BD player so opted for the DVD instead.  I really 
wasn't interested in buying the disc but just watching it.  A Netflix 
streaming version would have been just fine or second to that a DVD 
rental.  But this title never was mass produced on DVD, just VHS.

Pricing content is a high art form and something I think that MBA 
schooled execs are clueless about.  Even my client I have done some game 
ports for when I asked how some of the titles were selling because IMO 
he has them priced too high told me he perceived their value at that.  
Problem is the public doesn't.  And that's who you need to please to 
sell anything.  That doesn't mean you have to give it away either.

On 11/02/2011 02:41 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
 To some extent, I've been less charmed by the latest two episodes of
 HBO's Enlightened while watching it, but in retrospect I've realized
 that Mike White and Laura Dern *are* still dealing with material that is
 relevant to FFL and to the cult of spiritual narcissism; it's just more
 subtle than in the first 2 episodes.

 It's now been a week since Amy has returned from her idyllic (although
 enforced) retreat in Hawaii. Her epiphany -- whatever it was -- had
 faded in significance, and now she's focused on trying to still live an
 enlightened life out in the real world. In Ep4, confronted with her
 first weekend, she has to figure out what to do with it.

 She first decides to spend it meditating, which gives us a classic (and
 hilarious) opportunity to listen to her inner thoughts in pretty much
 the classic TMer meditation. That is, all thoughts, no silence, all
 trivia and self-involvement. Her first thoughts are about being 40 and
 having wrinkles. Then she comes back to the mantra and tries to
 visualize something more positive, and lapses into thoughts of a happier
 time. But then, inspired by visions of that happy time, she sets out to
 recreate this fantasy happier time. And that's where the trouble begins.

 She phones her ex-husband in the middle of the night, waking him, and
 tells him that he's just got to go off river rafting with her. At 7:00
 AM the next morning. And here's where the connection to TM and to
 cultism comes in; she doesn't *ask* him whether he wants to go, she
 tells him that he needs to, and makes the reservations herself. Being
 essentially a nice guy, he thinks she's crazy, but agrees to go anyway.
 They get there, are out on the river, and for a few minutes both are
 feeling a little of the fantasy happiness she was seeking.

 But then reality intrudes. She finds that he brought along a bag full of
 drugs and, offended in the way that only a New Age twif can be offended,
 throws them away. He goes ballistic, and storms away, her following. As
 he finds a new stash and gets high, she harangues him with what a
 low-life he is, continually insisting 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[Bob Price]

;-)...




From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 12:40:04 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy


  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:

 I worked on the Houston (Navasota, Grimes County) capital for 
 room and board. And yes, shared an unheated cabin. Barhroom 
 was the bushes outside. Yes, it gets cold in Texas during the 
 Winter. Maharishi was absolutely right.  The movement belongs 
 to those who move large quantities of cash across national 
 borders, undetected.

I never went to any of the more modern TM hovels.
I used to teach a lot of residence courses at 
Soboba (I think the name was) in southern CA,
and attended many courses at Cobb Mountain in
northern CA. The former didn't really have much
personality, but the latter did. It had been
some kind of camp or retreat facility before
the TMO acquired it, and I found it charming,
with its old clapboard cottages and rustic
camp-era dining/meeting hall. Plus, the fact
that most everyone was in a separate cottage
made it easier to fool around on ATR courses. :-)

The worst facility experience I had, in retro-
spect, was probably at Poland Springs, ME. I got
to see the balance sheets for that one after the
course was over. The TMO paid something like $15
per night per participant for the room, and was
supposed to pay something like $10 per person per 
day for food. They charged us a great deal more 
than that for the rooms, and actually (according 
to the financial records for the course) spent 
less than $4 per person per day on food. Half of 
the fruit served to us at meals was rotten.

In Europe most facilities were acceptable, because
they were owned (and thus maintained) by someone
other than the TMO. The minute they started buy-
ing their own places, however, all concept of
maintenance or improvement went in the toilet
and they allowed the places to slide into dis-
repair and in some cases public health hazard
status. And they could do this because they knew
that no one would ever complain; the course par-
ticipants were too spaced out and guru-whipped 
to even *consider* complaining.


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[Tom Pall]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:40 PM, turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:
 
  I worked on the Houston (Navasota, Grimes County) capital for
  room and board. And yes, shared an unheated cabin. Barhroom
  was the bushes outside. Yes, it gets cold in Texas during the
  Winter. Maharishi was absolutely right.  The movement belongs
  to those who move large quantities of cash across national
  borders, undetected.

 I never went to any of the more modern TM hovels.
 I used to teach a lot of residence courses at
 Soboba (I think the name was) in southern CA,
 and attended many courses at Cobb Mountain in
 northern CA. The former didn't really have much
 personality, but the latter did. It had been
 some kind of camp or retreat facility before
 the TMO acquired it, and I found it charming,
 with its old clapboard cottages and rustic
 camp-era dining/meeting hall. Plus, the fact
 that most everyone was in a separate cottage
 made it easier to fool around on ATR courses. :-)


I attended many course at Cobb, including my ?flying? block.   My flying
block had a lot of live wires.   The cabins closest to the main buildings
were given to married, senior people.   They brought with them the proper
mixings for martinis and had cocktail hour before time to do evening
program.   I went back for many WPAs and the men often flew on what had
been the dance floor.   That place had been a really hopping place for
Summers and especially the weekend.  The dance floor was on springs, and
yes, in typical TMO style, Cobb Mountain had a reputation for lots of
alcohol flowing, lots of extramarital sex.   Back to my flying block.  We
had a fiddler from Boston.  When our mommies and daddies went to bed we had
hoe downs outside the main buildings.   A couple times we woke up the sidhi
administrators who told us to cut out the dancing and go to bed.

Cobb Mountain was in typical decay and the cabins were drafty as heck.
And yes, we were within something like 1,500 feet of the tree line so it
got cold, even in Spring and Fall.

[FairfieldLife] The Origin of the Universe and the Arrow of Time

[John]

The lecturer speculates as to what happened before the Big Bang.  He states 
that there was a huge black empty space of nothingness.  But since empty space 
has dark energy, this force eventually created the background for the Big Bang 
to occur.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEr-t17m2FoNR=1

[FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Bhairitu]

Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some 
quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs

Re: [FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Vaj]

On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

 Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some 
 quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
 http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs


Yeah, Jobs (whose strange health habits were fairly well known) reminds me a 
lot of TM Org and other New Ages faddists: weird diets, odd supplementation 
regimes, unusual approaches to disease and avoidance of modern mainstream 
healthcare. Often these are taken to obsessive and excessive levels: worrying 
about the latest-greatest supplements or dosing up on Indian or Chinese herbs 
to the point of heavy-metal overload.

Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.

The only good news in this case is now I may eventually get Flash on my 
iPad…but otherwise what a waste of a life, all based on holding strange 
untenable beliefs.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[whynotnow7]

HA! King Baby! great band name too.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Ravi,
 
 
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
 
   

[FairfieldLife] The iPad's $0.99 Moog synthesizer

[Vaj]

If you have an iPad, don't miss the 99 cent version of the Moog synth, the 
Animoog. It will soon go up to 30 USD. It's incredible in that you can do much 
more on this than with an original Minimoog. And it's MIDI compatible. 

Here's a great review, tutorial and intro:

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2011/10/animoog-moogs-first-ipad-synth-in-videos-and-instrumental-use/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Bhairitu]

On 11/02/2011 02:22 PM, Vaj wrote:
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

 Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some
 quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
 http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs

 Yeah, Jobs (whose strange health habits were fairly well known) reminds me a 
 lot of TM Org and other New Ages faddists: weird diets, odd supplementation 
 regimes, unusual approaches to disease and avoidance of modern mainstream 
 healthcare. Often these are taken to obsessive and excessive levels: worrying 
 about the latest-greatest supplements or dosing up on Indian or Chinese herbs 
 to the point of heavy-metal overload.

Modern mainstream healthcare isn't very good when it comes to diet.  
Too many doctors want a one diet fits all approach and that won't 
work.  And how many times have you heard as I have from air head 
nationalists eat plenty of fruits and vegetables.  Vegetables yes but 
fruits can cause blood sugar imbalances and need to be addressed with 
care.  Doctors are lucky if they get one semester on nutrition.  
Probably the biggest influence on the body is what you eat daily.

The ancients had a good handle on it be it Ayurveda or Chinese 
medicine.  It's really nothing much more than biochemistry but as one 
former med student told me many med students find biochemistry 
challenging and have difficulty passing the course.  Perhaps we should 
limit medicine to those with actually have a talent for it rather than 
those whose parents were doctors.

 Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
 could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
 Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
 almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.

I haven't checked into it yet but I heard a claim that he lived 8 years 
beyond diagnosis when 1 to 2 years is the average so some things he did 
might have helped.
 The only good news in this case is now I may eventually get Flash on my 
 iPad…but otherwise what a waste of a life, all based on holding strange 
 untenable beliefs.

You mean like I have on my Android tablet. :-D




To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

* To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

* To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[richardwillytexwilliams]

  ...but somehow the TMO went 'bat-shit crazy' 
  because you went over to work for Fred Lenz. LoL!

wayback71:
 Richard, I doubt Barry will read or respond to 
 your post.  

Barry reads every single post here, every single day.

 But I think  Barry was active in the TMO for 
 several years beyond 1972...

Maybe so, but I just thought it was funny when
Barry said the TMO went bat-shit crazy and then
Barry went over to the bat-shit crazy Lenz. LoL!

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Day That TMers Became Officially Crazy

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote:

 The movement belongs to those who move. Those who were stuck on the idea 
 that the movement and the TMO were ONLY about the 7-step program were, well, 
 stuck. I think M and TM were always a moving target about gateways to 
 consciousness and purifying collective consciousness, via a lot of different 
 avenues.


BINGO !


The lazy ones refused to change and later, even to meditate. In fact many 
stopped TM because it brings about change. 
Can't have that.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Ravi Yogi]

Bob,

Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally a 
child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty harmless.

I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they feel 
harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.

So I like having him here and making fun of him.


On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Ravi,
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@... wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
   
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Ravi Yogi]

And I can understand why Curtis feels so protective of him :-). He's just being 
a protective parent though setting a bad example to other patents..LOL..

Now Vaj is another story, he is just a crook :-)


On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net wrote:

 Bob,
 
 Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
 pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally 
 a child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
 harmless.
 
 I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they 
 feel harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.
 
 So I like having him here and making fun of him.
 
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
 Ravi,
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@... wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
   
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Bob Price]

Ravi,


Right on, do you we should stop teasing them?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laxyoaHOP1cfeature=related




From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:03:57 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues



Bob,

Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally a 
child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty harmless.

I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they feel 
harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.

So I like having him here and making fun of him.



On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:



Ravi,

Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 

That was easy.


From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
 pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
 it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
 other people's POV here. 

BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
experiment, and now they are free to react as 
they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 

It's been fun chumming the waters a little
this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.

When it comes to the people I have taken bang
flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
anyone of anything. They are free to continue
to try to make any case against me they wish, 
if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)

I really am hoping to step away from the news-
group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
there is little said here that interests me 
intellectually all that much these days; I just
can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
But there's really no challenge even in that
any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
pushed. Better I should do like the more
sensible posters here and just lay low until
and if something is said that I actually 
find interesting.

Or not. We'll see...

  

     

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Bob Price]

I agree with you; lets make them happy again---but we should be careful, they 
cry so easily.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1v=9F3dUbqtvdc




From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:08:32 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues



And I can understand why Curtis feels so protective of him :-). He's just being 
a protective parent though setting a bad example to other patents..LOL..

Now Vaj is another story, he is just a crook :-)



On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net wrote:



Bob,


Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally a 
child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
harmless.


I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they feel 
harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.


So I like having him here and making fun of him.



On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:


  
Ravi,

Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 

That was easy.


From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
 pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
 it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
 other people's POV here. 

BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
experiment, and now they are free to react as 
they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 

It's been fun chumming the waters a little
this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.

When it comes to the people I have taken bang
flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
anyone of anything. They are free to continue
to try to make any case against me they wish, 
if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)

I really am hoping to step away from the news-
group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
there is little said here that interests me 
intellectually all that much these days; I just
can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
But there's really no challenge even in that
any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
pushed. Better I should do like the more
sensible posters here and just lay low until
and if something is said that I actually 
find interesting.

Or not. We'll see...

  

     

Re: [FairfieldLife] The iPad's $0.99 Moog synthesizer

[Bhairitu]

On 11/02/2011 02:36 PM, Vaj wrote:
 If you have an iPad, don't miss the 99 cent version of the Moog synth, the 
 Animoog. It will soon go up to 30 USD. It's incredible in that you can do 
 much more on this than with an original Minimoog. And it's MIDI compatible.

 Here's a great review, tutorial and intro:

 http://createdigitalmusic.com/2011/10/animoog-moogs-first-ipad-synth-in-videos-and-instrumental-use/

Cute but the Mini Moog is so dated.  Most music programs come with banks 
of legacy synths including it.  When I came back from TTC, a friend who 
operated a music store hired me to hang out in his store and help 
drummers and keyboard players.  I actually sold more Mini Moogs than 
drums.  With drums I was a local fast gun and with keyboards I just 
knew how to navigate the synth which was a little daunting to even 
experienced keyboardists.

What pisses me about Android is they removed the full MIDI library as I 
have an app idea that requires it for real time controllable algorithmic 
music.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Ravi Yogi]

Trust me I do feel bad (not guilty) teasing him, so I go through phases of 
teasing and not teasing Barry. And you are right it's about time I stopped 
since he doesn't understand or unwilling to acknowledge my point anyway. I can 
offer my serious rebuttal to his posts which I have done several times in the 
past anyway. His posts are almost always so outrageous that I sometimes don't 
have time and I just mock/tease but yeah I should reconsider.

Others might differ.

Sorry couldn't watch the video - my damn iPhone doesn't load it.

P.S I'm moving to an apartment 2 blocks from Rose Market and a block away from 
the beach, weird coincidence :-)


On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:10 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Ravi,
 
 Right on, do you we should stop teasing them?
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laxyoaHOP1cfeature=related
 
 
 From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:03:57 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 Bob,
 
 Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
 pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally 
 a child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
 harmless.
 
 I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they 
 feel harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.
 
 So I like having him here and making fun of him.
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
 Ravi,
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@... wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
   
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Vaj]

On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

 Modern mainstream healthcare isn't very good when it comes to diet.

It depends on the physician. I see an MD who's an Integrative practitioner.

  
 Too many doctors want a one diet fits all approach and that won't 
 work.  And how many times have you heard as I have from air head 
 nationalists eat plenty of fruits and vegetables.  Vegetables yes but 
 fruits can cause blood sugar imbalances and need to be addressed with 
 care.  Doctors are lucky if they get one semester on nutrition.  
 Probably the biggest influence on the body is what you eat daily.
 
 The ancients had a good handle on it be it Ayurveda or Chinese 
 medicine.  It's really nothing much more than biochemistry but as one 
 former med student told me many med students find biochemistry 
 challenging and have difficulty passing the course.  Perhaps we should 
 limit medicine to those with actually have a talent for it rather than 
 those whose parents were doctors.

Biochem and P-chem are usually the make or break courses for most pre-Med 
students.

Foods are drugs, albeit in very dilute forms. It's really that simple or that 
complex. Element based medical systems put a friendly user interface on this 
complexity so anyone can use it. But it's not a be-all and end-all. Much of the 
laws of karma are stored in our underlying DNA.

Some things are actually much more difficult to handle with herbs and 
supplementation than with common pharmaceuticals. And most holistic-type 
practitioners do not possess the wisdom to distinguish the differences.

 
 Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
 could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
 Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
 almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.
 
 I haven't checked into it yet but I heard a claim that he lived 8 years 
 beyond diagnosis when 1 to 2 years is the average so some things he did 
 might have helped.

The type of pancreatic cancer he had was a relatively rare one which was 
survivable - if you didn't do the weird diet miracle-cure BS.






To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

* To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

* To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [FairfieldLife] The iPad's $0.99 Moog synthesizer

[Vaj]

On Nov 2, 2011, at 6:22 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

 On 11/02/2011 02:36 PM, Vaj wrote:
  If you have an iPad, don't miss the 99 cent version of the Moog synth, the 
  Animoog. It will soon go up to 30 USD. It's incredible in that you can do 
  much more on this than with an original Minimoog. And it's MIDI compatible.
 
  Here's a great review, tutorial and intro:
 
  http://createdigitalmusic.com/2011/10/animoog-moogs-first-ipad-synth-in-videos-and-instrumental-use/
 
 Cute but the Mini Moog is so dated. 


This is way beyond the Minimoog. It's not only polyphonic, it's a microtonal 
polytouch instrument as well.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Bob Price]

Great place you are moving too. If you haven't already; drive north on highway 
1 to the Hearst Castle---fantastic trip. The tapestries, in the pool 
room---alone, are worth the trip. I walked around the grounds imagining Cary 
Grant staring up at bright white clouds in a blue blue sky---absolutely 
snookered on acid.   




From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:25:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues



Trust me I do feel bad (not guilty) teasing him, so I go through phases of 
teasing and not teasing Barry. And you are right it's about time I stopped 
since he doesn't understand or unwilling to acknowledge my point anyway. I can 
offer my serious rebuttal to his posts which I have done several times in the 
past anyway. His posts are almost always so outrageous that I sometimes don't 
have time and I just mock/tease but yeah I should reconsider.

Others might differ.

Sorry couldn't watch the video - my damn iPhone doesn't load it.

P.S I'm moving to an apartment 2 blocks from Rose Market and a block away from 
the beach, weird coincidence :-)



On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:10 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:



Ravi,

Right on, do you we should stop teasing them?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laxyoaHOP1cfeature=related


From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:03:57 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

Bob,

Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally a 
child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
harmless.

I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they feel 
harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.

So I like having him here and making fun of him.

On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:

Ravi,

Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 

That was easy.


From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
 labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
 pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
 it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
 other people's POV here. 

BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
experiment, and now they are free to react as 
they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 

It's been fun chumming the waters a little
this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.

When it comes to the people I have taken bang
flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
anyone of anything. They are free to continue
to try to make any case against me they wish, 
if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)

I really am hoping to step away from the news-
group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
there is little said here that interests me 
intellectually all that much these days; I just
can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
But there's really no challenge even in that
any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
pushed. Better I should do like the more
sensible posters here and just lay low until
and if something is said that I actually 
find interesting.

Or not. We'll see...

  

    

     

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Ravi Yogi]

Nice :-), sure will do.

On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:37 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 
 
 Great place you are moving too. If you haven't already; drive north on 
 highway 1 to the Hearst Castle---fantastic trip. The tapestries, in the pool 
 room---alone, are worth the trip. I walked around the grounds imagining Cary 
 Grant staring up at bright white clouds in a blue blue sky---absolutely 
 snookered on acid.   
 
 
 From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:25:08 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 Trust me I do feel bad (not guilty) teasing him, so I go through phases of 
 teasing and not teasing Barry. And you are right it's about time I stopped 
 since he doesn't understand or unwilling to acknowledge my point anyway. I 
 can offer my serious rebuttal to his posts which I have done several times in 
 the past anyway. His posts are almost always so outrageous that I sometimes 
 don't have time and I just mock/tease but yeah I should reconsider.
 
 Others might differ.
 
 Sorry couldn't watch the video - my damn iPhone doesn't load it.
 
 P.S I'm moving to an apartment 2 blocks from Rose Market and a block away 
 from the beach, weird coincidence :-)
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:10 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
 Ravi,
 
 Right on, do you we should stop teasing them?
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laxyoaHOP1cfeature=related
 
 
 From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:03:57 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 Bob,
 
 Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
 pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally 
 a child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
 harmless.
 
 I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they 
 feel harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.
 
 So I like having him here and making fun of him.
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
 Ravi,
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@... wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
   
 
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:

 Dear curtis, I know what blues is. But hearing what you
 manage to shriek about MMM, the latest him being worse
 than Mao,

Ah Nabbie, what a gift you have bestowed.  Usually I would
correct you concerning this vicious lie pointing out that
my point about Mao had to do with the unreliability of
people's subjective darshon experiences since he had so
many more millions who attributed God-like status on him
and commented on his powerful presence filling Tienanmen
Square.
   
   This was one of your points. Another, however, had to
   do with how both MMY and Mao staged their appearances
   before their followers specifically to evoke this
   subjective darshan experience that led their followers
   to confer God-like status on them.
   
   Other points involved personality traits the two of
   them had in common, such as hypocrisy (concerning their
   sexual dalliances, for example).
   
   So in fact it wasn't just about the unreliability of
   darshan experiences; you were comparing MMY and Mao as
   human beings.
   
   But you're quite right, Nabby is lying in one respect:
   You never said MMY was *worse* than Mao. Rather, you
   said MMY was a rather dim bulb compared to Mao.
   
   Actually, in context, maybe that *does* qualify as
   worse, and Nabby isn't lying after all.
   
   (You tried this sort of approach once before, Curtis,
   with regard to a different issue, and you fouled it up
   then too. You just aren't very good at it. You have
   trouble picking *parallels*, among other things.)
  
  So I never said that Maharishi was worse than Mao despite
  your attempt to twist it into that with a clumsy two step.
  It is obvious how Nabbie meant it and your attempts at
  obfuscation have failed.
 
 Sheesh, Curtis, that was a jocular throwaway afterthought.
 
  And the upshot is for you to attempt to correct me about what
  point I was making
 
 I *did* correct your claim about the point you had
 been making. You attempted to limit it to the darshan
 experiences of followers, whereas in fact you also
 compared Mao and MMY as men. That is, of course, what
 Nabby was referring to. So if he was being dishonest
 about the comparison, so were you to claim you weren't
 comparing them.
 
  rather than show some ethical disapproval
  for this blatant and offensive lie.
 
 Remember what I said about the kind of gun Nabby uses?
 Please read the parenthetical above again.
 
  Thanks for being predictable.  Now you can drop the superior
  ethical facade because you have just proven how fake and self-
  serving the act was.
 
 Nice try, no cigar. As I said, you aren't very good
 at this sort of approach.
 
 And you know what? I've been pondering what Robin has
 said about your appropriation of context. I think this
 is an example. You have terrible difficulty perceiving
 any context but your own. Not that we all aren't limited
 to some degree in perceiving another person's context,
 but most of us do take a stab at it, if only so that we
 can more effectively argue our own perspective. You
 rarely even try.

In my experience, everyone has difficulty in perceiving any context but their 
own. Now why would that be? Think about it. Exactly where is all the 
information we process located, if we are thinking about it?

As for the argument going on here, I have not been following it; I am not 
commenting on the merits of demerits of the discussion or its context. There 
has been a certain lack of power and connectivity in the New York Tri-State 
area, and I have been interested in other things than the forum lately, what 
with attempting to stay warm etc., and having a strong interest in what is 
happening in Greece and Europe. But I am glad to see the forum is still here.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues

[Ravi Yogi]

Cute babies ..:-)

On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 
 
 I agree with you; lets make them happy again---but we should be careful, they 
 cry so easily.
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1v=9F3dUbqtvdc
 
 
 From: Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 3:08:32 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 And I can understand why Curtis feels so protective of him :-). He's just 
 being a protective parent though setting a bad example to other patents..LOL..
 
 Now Vaj is another story, he is just a crook :-)
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net wrote:
 
 Bob,
 
 
 Sure he is..this message is typical of his. But I have looked at Barry's 
 pictures on FB, he looks pretty naive and innocent. So he may be emotionally 
 a child, come across as vicious, harsh and offensive but he seems pretty 
 harmless.
 
 
 I'm surprised at the naïveté of some of the TM'ers and I can see why they 
 feel harmed by their involvement with cults and Gurus.
 
 
 So I like having him here and making fun of him.
 
 
 
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
 
   
 Ravi,
 
 Was this King Baby's farewell speech? 
 
 That was easy.
 
 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 10:34:01 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blues
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@... wrote:
 
  BTW from now on, any missile Barry lobs your way is hereby 
  labeled a bang flag on a toy gun, and I will delight in 
  pointing our whether it causes you to get freaked about 
  it. But only to help you improve your skills understanding 
  other people's POV here. 
 
 BTW from now on I doubt I will be lobbing any
 even bang flag missiles her way, or Robin's,
 or Bob's. I've done the setup for this week's
 experiment, and now they are free to react as 
 they wish. Judy has only one more post this week 
 in which to do so, so we'll see how attached she 
 is to holding a grudge when she returns next week. 
 
 It's been fun chumming the waters a little
 this week, but a kind of fun I will have less
 time for soon, so don't hope for more of it.
 
 When it comes to the people I have taken bang
 flag potshots at, I have either made my case,
 or I have not. Unlike them, I don't feel that
 repeating it ad infinitum is going to convince
 anyone of anything. They are free to continue
 to try to make any case against me they wish, 
 if they'd like. As if -- if my assessment of
 them is correct -- they have any choice. :-)
 
 I really am hoping to step away from the news-
 group a little. As you've probably noticed, 
 there is little said here that interests me 
 intellectually all that much these days; I just
 can't identify with much of it. So I have (mea
 culpa) tried to fill the interest gap by 
 perversely pushing a few easily-pushed buttons.
 But there's really no challenge even in that
 any more, since the buttons are SO easily 
 pushed. Better I should do like the more
 sensible posters here and just lay low until
 and if something is said that I actually 
 find interesting.
 
 Or not. We'll see...
 
   
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Sal Sunshine]

On Nov 2, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Vaj wrote:

 On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
 
 Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some 
 quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
 http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs
 
 
 Yeah, Jobs (whose strange health habits were fairly well known) reminds me a 
 lot of TM Org and other New Ages faddists: weird diets, odd supplementation 
 regimes, unusual approaches to disease and avoidance of modern mainstream 
 healthcare. Often these are taken to obsessive and excessive levels: worrying 
 about the latest-greatest supplements or dosing up on Indian or Chinese herbs 
 to the point of heavy-metal overload.

It was the carrots-and-apples-for-weeks that
kind of got to me.  Besides overload, really
boring.   Probably explain his shifting
moods too. Not such a great idea being CEO of a 
major company, holding meetings, etc while you're
basically starving yourself.  Wonder what his 
wife's take on all of that including his
unconventional ideas on his cancer treatment was.

 Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
 could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
 Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
 almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.
 
 The only good news in this case is now I may eventually get Flash on my iPad…

Really?  So then they should work with, say,
Amazon instant videos?  That would be nice.
Just one more thing to thank Steve for.

Sal 









To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

* To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

* To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Oct 29 00:00:00 2011
End Date (UTC): Sat Nov 05 00:00:00 2011
573 messages as of (UTC) Wed Nov 02 23:11:56 2011

50 authfriend jst...@panix.com
42 turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
42 curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com
36 Yifu yifux...@yahoo.com
35 Buck dhamiltony...@yahoo.com
33 whynotnow7 whynotn...@yahoo.com
30 Tom Pall thomas.p...@gmail.com
29 obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com
28 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net
27 Ravi Yogi raviy...@att.net
25 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net
24 maskedzebra no_re...@yahoogroups.com
23 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
20 John jr_...@yahoo.com
16 Bob Price bobpri...@yahoo.com
14 merudanda no_re...@yahoogroups.com
12 Denise Evans dmevans...@yahoo.com
11 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 9 seventhray1 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net
 8 wgm4u anitaoak...@att.net
 8 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com
 8 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com
 7 tartbrain no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 6 richardwillytexwilliams willy...@yahoo.com
 5 shukra69 shukr...@yahoo.ca
 4 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com
 3 johnt johnlasher20002...@yahoo.com
 3 Susan waybac...@yahoo.com
 2 anatol_zinc anatol_z...@yahoo.com
 2 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com
 1 yifuxero yifux...@yahoo.com
 1 seekliberation seekliberat...@yahoo.com
 1 russell sedman russellc...@yahoo.co.uk
 1 merlin vedamer...@yahoo.de
 1 jr_esq jr_...@yahoo.com
 1 azgrey no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 1 Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com
 1 Paulo Barbosa tprob...@terra.com.br
 1 P Duff pd...@microcephalic-endeavors.com
 1 Jean jeanjes...@q.com
 1 martin.quickman martin.quick...@yahoo.co.uk

Posters: 41
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] Thousands March on Port of Oakland

[Bhairitu]

Quite a turn out over in Oakland.  They are now arriving at the Port of 
Oakland shutting it down.  Not much police presence.  Lots of families 
coming out for the protest too.
http://www.livestream.com/occupyoakland
and
http://www.kron4.com/Default.aspx

Re: [FairfieldLife] Steve Jobs diet quirks

[Bhairitu]

On 11/02/2011 03:29 PM, Vaj wrote:
 On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

 Modern mainstream healthcare isn't very good when it comes to diet.
 It depends on the physician. I see an MD who's an Integrative practitioner.

Yes it does depend on the physician.  My ayurvedic doc was an MD.  Moved 
out of the area to run a hospital up north.

California isn't as hip about such stuff as people might think because 
the California Medical Association rules with an iron hand in lockstep 
with Big Pharma.  Doctors have become drug pushers.


 Too many doctors want a one diet fits all approach and that won't
 work.  And how many times have you heard as I have from air head
 nationalists eat plenty of fruits and vegetables.  Vegetables yes but
 fruits can cause blood sugar imbalances and need to be addressed with
 care.  Doctors are lucky if they get one semester on nutrition.
 Probably the biggest influence on the body is what you eat daily.

 The ancients had a good handle on it be it Ayurveda or Chinese
 medicine.  It's really nothing much more than biochemistry but as one
 former med student told me many med students find biochemistry
 challenging and have difficulty passing the course.  Perhaps we should
 limit medicine to those with actually have a talent for it rather than
 those whose parents were doctors.
 Biochem and P-chem are usually the make or break courses for most pre-Med 
 students.

 Foods are drugs, albeit in very dilute forms. It's really that simple or that 
 complex. Element based medical systems put a friendly user interface on this 
 complexity so anyone can use it. But it's not a be-all and end-all. Much of 
 the laws of karma are stored in our underlying DNA.

 Some things are actually much more difficult to handle with herbs and 
 supplementation than with common pharmaceuticals. And most holistic-type 
 practitioners do not possess the wisdom to distinguish the differences.

I would disagree with that.  After all the holistic practitioners I had 
*were* MDs.  And as you should know there are pharmaceuticals that were 
derived from the molecular structure of herbs used for remedies.

I'm just not big on conventional medicine since I've had years of 
success with alternative care.  Sure there are things like a cataract 
that alternative does not even get into.  I think there are too many 
sour grapes on FFL because of a few bad alternative practitioners.





To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

* To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

* To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[FairfieldLife] Israel wants to pick a fight

[Bhairitu]

Seems those crazy people over in Israel who believe the magic man in the 
sky has given them some magic land all for themselves want to pick a 
fight with their neighbor Iran.  Either that or they want to distract 
the world from a pending class war.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/02/in-israel-speculation-over-strike-on-iran-grows/

No US lives for Israel!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Steve Jobs diet quirks

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@... wrote:

 On Nov 2, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Vaj wrote:
 
  On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
  
  Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some 
  quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
  http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs
  
  
  Yeah, Jobs (whose strange health habits were fairly well known) reminds me 
  a lot of TM Org and other New Ages faddists: weird diets, odd 
  supplementation regimes, unusual approaches to disease and avoidance of 
  modern mainstream healthcare. Often these are taken to obsessive and 
  excessive levels: worrying about the latest-greatest supplements or dosing 
  up on Indian or Chinese herbs to the point of heavy-metal overload.
 
 It was the carrots-and-apples-for-weeks that
 kind of got to me.  Besides overload, really
 boring.   Probably explain his shifting
 moods too. Not such a great idea being CEO of a 
 major company, holding meetings, etc while you're
 basically starving yourself.  Wonder what his 
 wife's take on all of that including his
 unconventional ideas on his cancer treatment was.
 
  Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
  could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
  Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
  almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.
  
  The only good news in this case is now I may eventually get Flash on my 
  iPad…
 
 Really?  So then they should work with, say,
 Amazon instant videos?  That would be nice.
 Just one more thing to thank Steve for.
 

 Sal

Presumably the $199 Amazon Kindle Fire will also play Amazon Instant Video. And 
for Prime members, much of that library is free. An offer I-tunes lacks (or 
have I missed that.) Amazon Instant Video recently acquired access to all PBS 
content. The expands their library a lot -- for quality programming (should one 
be inclined towards documentaries -- I like a lot of their stuff.) 

Way cheaper tablet, way cheaper content. And Droid Honeycomb looks great.   

Re: [FairfieldLife] Republican

[Mike Dixon]

Wow! I didn't realize Michelle Obama was such a Republican!




From: Tom Pall thomas.p...@gmail.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 10:31 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Republican [1 Attachment]


 
   
 
 
[Attachment(s) from Tom Pall included below]  
   
  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Steve Jobs Last Words

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@... wrote:

 On Nov 2, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Vaj wrote:
 
  On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
  
  Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some 
  quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts:
  http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs
  
  
  Yeah, Jobs (whose strange health habits were fairly well known) reminds me 
  a lot of TM Org and other New Ages faddists: weird diets, odd 
  supplementation regimes, unusual approaches to disease and avoidance of 
  modern mainstream healthcare. Often these are taken to obsessive and 
  excessive levels: worrying about the latest-greatest supplements or dosing 
  up on Indian or Chinese herbs to the point of heavy-metal overload.
 
 It was the carrots-and-apples-for-weeks that
 kind of got to me.  Besides overload, really
 boring.   Probably explain his shifting
 moods too. Not such a great idea being CEO of a 
 major company, holding meetings, etc while you're
 basically starving yourself.  Wonder what his 
 wife's take on all of that including his
 unconventional ideas on his cancer treatment was.
 
  Jobs clearly signed his own death certificate with the strange idea that he 
  could force a rare form of pancreatic CA into remission through diet. 
  Occasionally you'll see someone who gets lucky with such an approach, but 
  almost invariably these types just suddenly disappear. Gone.

His sister said his last words were Oh Wow. Oh Wow, Oh Wow as he looked past 
his family surrounding him, into the broader expanse of the room. Like he saw 
something not apparent to the bystanders. Reminiscent of  other death, near 
death reports. Something roughly parallel when my dad died. And my mom said 
similar when her mom died.

( I know. Sometimes I slip out of rational, empirical mode into sentimental 
spiritualism state. Damn, slap me.)