[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
Partial transcript: As we draw close to finalizing and passing real health insurance reform, the defenders of the Notice how Obama has shifted the discussion from health care reform to health INSURANCE reform. IMO the distinction is simply a weasel out of emphasizing health care. I suspect at the end of the day, the insurance industry will get what they want and then some. status quo and political point-scorers in Washington are growing fiercer in their opposition. In recent days and weeks, some have been using misleading information to defeat what they know is the best chance of reform we have ever had. That is why it is important, especially now, as Senators and Representatives head home and meet with their constituents, for you, the American people, to have all the facts. So, let me explain what reform will mean for you. And let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care. That's simply not true. This isn't about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it's about putting you in charge of your health insurance. The right wing talking point on this is wrong. They fear a public option (translation: government in charge). Obama is saying the government will not be in charge (translation: no public option). When I hear putting you in charge, I hear GW Bush saying, Health Savings Account. Again, health insurance reform I know he's talking about this in a different context, but I my ears are attuned to Obama code when I hear it and I'm suspicious. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. And while reform is obviously essential for the 46 million Americans who don't have health insurance, it will also provide more stability and security to the hundreds of millions who do. Right now, we have a system that works well for the insurance industry, but that doesn't always work well for you. What we need, and what we will have when we pass health insurance reform, Again health insurance reform are consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and that insurance companies are held accountable. We will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms, colonoscopies, or eye and foot exams for diabetics, so we can avoid chronic illnesses that cost too many lives and too much money. Requiring insurance to cover prevention is a great idea but who will pay? The insurance companies certainly aren't going to pick up the tab. Question: If we require insurance to cover prevention will the consumer be required to participate in prevention? We will stop insurance companies from denying coverage because of a person's medical history. I will never forget watching my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final days, worrying about whether her insurer would claim her illness was a preexisting condition. I have met so many Americans who worry about the same thing. That's why, under these reforms, insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage because of a previous illness or injury. And insurance companies will no longer be allowed to drop or water down coverage for someone who has become seriously ill. Your health insurance ought to be there for you when it counts and reform will make sure it is. This is good. Hillary made a strong case for this as well. With reform, insurance companies will also have to limit how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses. And we will stop insurance companies from placing arbitrary caps on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime because no one in America should go broke because of illness. This is good and I agree. In the end, the debate about health insurance reform boils down to a choice between two approaches. The first is almost guaranteed to double health costs over the next decade, make millions more Americans uninsured, leave those with insurance vulnerable to arbitrary denials of coverage, and bankrupt state and federal governments. That's the status quo. That's the health care system we have right now. I agree. The status quo is not good. Obama nicely lays out the specifics. So, we can either continue this approach, or we can choose another one one that will protect people against unfair insurance practices; provide quality, affordable insurance to every American; and bring down rising costs that are swamping families, businesses, and our budgets. That's the health care system we can bring about with reform. Vague, vague and again vague rhetoric. There are those who are focused on the so-called politics of health care; who are trying to exploit differences or concerns for political gain. That's to be expected. That's Washington. But let's never forget that this isn't about politics. This is about people's
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
This just in from Violet: The lid has been blown on Obama's secret deal with Big Pharma (doubtless one of many, many secret deals in this whole mess): the White House promised that healthcare reform would specifically exclude any option for Medicare to negotiate lower prices on prescriptions or import cheaper drugs from Canada. Yes, the media is partially to blame for the healthcare clusterfuck, but not entirely. Not even mostly. Obama himself has run this thing into the ground with rookie mistakes, including keeping secrets from his own damn party. You know, there's something to be said for electing political veterans with experience in shepherding complex legislation through Congress. LBJ was that kind of president, and Hillary would have been as well. Obama? Very good at speeches, astroturfing, and making sure everything is printed in Gotham font. Actual government? Not so much. In a meeting on healthcare reform, Rahm Emanuel calls progressive Democrats fucking stupid for advocating, uh, healthcare reform. Okay, you know what I just said about rookie mistakes and thinking you're still on the campaign trail? Times a billion, dude. Times a billion. http://tinyurl.com/mn2qlv http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/08/08/welcome-charlie-foxtrot/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Lots of rhetoric and diddly squat about a public option. I think he's describing what he's pretty sure he's going to get, and not promising anything he's uncertain about. The provisions he lists are just crucially important. He's said over and over again that he would like a public option. I don't see any reason to think that he really *doesn't* want it. But there's *huge* opposition to it, and he'd rather get what he outlines here than have the whole thing go down in flames because he's insisted on a public option. I don't know whether he could have gotten a public option if he'd been more forceful, but I seriously doubt it. I don't know whether it would have been better had he put together a bill, handed it to Congress, and told them to pass it, a la the Clintons, but he obviously thought that wasn't the way to go, that he'd be able to get more of what he wanted if he instead told Congress what he wanted and had them draft the bill. I think he's doing the best he can against very, very tough odds. Whether it's good enough, whether it's the best that *can* be done, isn't clear yet, at least not to me.
[FairfieldLife] BS vs. YS
My overall impression of Yoga-suutras compared to Brahma-suutras is that the former is more scientific, the latter more religious!
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'The Inside Scoop!/Obama The anti-Christ'
Wow, well this is the first time I have heard of many of these claims. Not surprising given the many innumerable things I have never heard. But it does spark up my interest in these particular ideas, especially about what is said in the dead sea scrolls. It is very true it can be interpreted many ways, however it is very good for contemplation and to cause one think and excersize their cosmic intuition and try out various scenarios for a possible match. I was pretty impressed with this statement; And now, what a miracle...a black man wins the WH... Senile Reagan turns in his grave... Bush receads like the snake he is back to Dallas.. So, now is our chance, this is our time, to work with the forces of good against the forces of retards, to take: Our Country Back! m, just poetic for the simplicity of the statement and the perfect voicing of a shared sentiment. Even though poor Bush really isn't as much a snake as a hapless backwoods retard,and a patsy,poor guy.For what I don't know but where 2 + __ = 4 there are so many ways it can be interpreted. retard plus president 2 times? Naw the missing equation must be 'non retard with evil sceme seeks pliable retard, will pay'. I mean, yes I vomited a little while accidently hearing snippets of their rehearsed meaningless bullshit, I mean speaches, however it is also true reagan didn't think he was against the poor and the blacks and fill in the many blanks with his policies. he just was what he was and to his credit he was that in the best of his capacity, he did have honor, but heart honor along with mental ideas built on old archetypal systems meant to keep those in power whom he felt could and would deal out the best justice to everyone. We voted him in, gave him power, its not a dictatorship. We could have fought for something better but I think we didn't really know we could or what that was until now. But we do know it now, and I sure hope we have moved past our 'let the little retard run the country, he sure can wave the flag good' stage and into our, GAWDAM, throw a dart at Europe and any leader there can spell and think, actually BETTER then most of their common class citizens, fakkk, lets try that here stage.
[FairfieldLife] Re: anyone interested in throwing rocks in the lake and talking spiritual esoteric
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mirza Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 2:48 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: anyone interested in throwing rocks in the lake and talking spiritual esoteric Looks to me like I DID start up a discussion. Yup, in any way that one can be described. And I'm happy enough with that. Obviously I won't agree with every one's opinion.There is some pretention on the site, some domineerance, some egoism. But it is mixed in with some very valuable and apreciated discussions about things I have found important to me for years. C'mon, I don't have to marry you guys.Thank God. And I would be shocked if no one ever wanted to go throw rocks at a pond and talk about opinions or experiences or contemplations with other people. If no one wants to from here,It just means I didn't find those people here. So what? So if you think I'm wasting my time, reply to someone elses thread. Or maybe mine is interesting after all? what question would you like me to ask you? I did ask a question, but which one do you desire me to ask? If you mean literally throw rocks in a pond (i.e., the reservoir) while discussing spiritual topics, I would certainly enjoy that, but I only have so much time for such things, and the Wednesday Night Satsang is my time. But if you mean figuratively, as we do in FFL, there has been plenty of rock-throwing over the years, both in the pond and at each other. Take your pick. There have been nearly a quarter million posts on FFL since its founding (a few days before 9/11) and the archives are full of some juicy nuggets. Just last night I was talking with Thom Krystofiak about the discussions he and L.B. Shriver used to have about karma, reincarnation, etc. LOL, reincarnation can be very fascinating. Sometimes it would be nice to get out and talk about it in nature. Seems like sitting in a feild or by a lake brings me closer to the source from which all these desires and seeking arises from and arises to. So, I mostly just thinking anytime, ever, if other people even a few wanted a few minutes out where it all touches the soul I would be game for that. I wasnt thinking anything structured or regimented, more like fishing but without the dead and flopping fish and the knifing the poor thing and throwing the guts around. Just kind of ruins it, ya know? And if hey, enough people did it and liked it could be something soul nourishing. Don't you think people are less likely to fight while under the moon or looking at stars? It's a chance to get of your head and into it at the same time.Gawd I think I'm gettin turned on thinking about it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: anyone interested in throwing rocks in the lake and talking spiritual esoteric
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: So you found this group and what were your expectations? Yes it is a group of people who have practiced, taught and some still practice TM. Many have gone off to other traditions. Many started in the 1960s or 1970s. So they been there, got the t-shirt, the t-shirt wore out and was thrown in the garbage. The spiritual horse gets discussed and sometimes beat to death. Enlightenment is for many is like walking and talked about as much. Of course there are a few who are trying to figure out what their feet and legs are for. There are some academic nit-picking among those whom the academic side of things appeal. But much of that is a waste of time. So if you were hoping to spark up some discussion you have about as much chance here as stumbling into a coterie of yogis in India except that here you wouldn't have pranks pulled on you like the Indian yogis would. Got a question? Looks to me like I DID start up a discussion. Yup, in any way that one can be described. And I'm happy enough with that. Obviously I won't agree with every one's opinion.There is some pretention on the site, some domineerance, some egoism. But it is mixed in with some very valuable and apreciated discussions about things I have found important to me for years. C'mon, I don't have to marry you guys.Thank God. And I would be shocked if no one ever wanted to go throw rocks at a pond and talk about opinions or experiences or contemplations with other people. If no one wants to from here,It just means I didn't find those people here. So what? So if you think I'm wasting my time, reply to someone elses thread. Or maybe mine is interesting after all? what question would you like me to ask you? I did ask a question, but which one do you desire me to ask? What I was trying to do was deflect something that often happens to newcomers who log on and try the hey folks lets have a discussion on this or that... What happens is someone here will jump on that person for being so presumptuous and chew them out usually result in Alex posting they have unsubscribed. This group can be cliquish but it is also open to newcomers but you have to approach the group much more subtly. We're all wary of people coming here and wanting to hijack the group to their spiritual concerns or believe the group is for purely spiritual discussion (and as Rick pointed out wholeness is spirituality so any topic goes) . And there are spiritual discussions here but they will pop up more spontaneous than contrived. In the words of Kyles mom WHAT WHAT WHAT!?!?!?!? presumptuousness? insublty from ME? wary of ME? Have you read what you wary guys are writing? Dude, your the one who jumped on me, how does that stop that from happening to me? I take responsibility for letting that offend me, as I clearly see some 'presumption' here. I hardly think I can damage this groups delicate subtle balance with my outlandish rude comments about stars and soul searching with other willing participants. However, if there are issues here that need to be cleared, I am willing to facilitate them by being that which they may be cleared upon. However, realize I may clear my own issues in return. And as long as someone isn't going to 'unsubscribe' me without my consent, I'll probably be fine. And if they do unsubscribe me without my consent, well, I think I'll be fine then too. So, lets get the posturing out of the way and maybe some of the 'oh we attack newcomers for their audacity to have thought us friendly' and just me be friendly. Just cuz I'm friendly doesn't mean I'm stupid nor does it mean I will be a big enough person to let it slide if I am treated that way. But, I will try. Well, tonight I will try, tomorrow, who knows. What I want to know is do YOU want to be friendly with ME? Cuz I'd like it. I'll do this back and forth a few times and then I'll talk to those who don't find me stupid or pretentious. My experience is that this is normally the exception not the rule, and dude, pardon my presumption, but if you are REALLY speaking for our group here with THIS response, your group is not so much 'cliquish' as it is sad and in need of repair. And I'll not damage you many more times in response if we can't get friendly, because my wish is not to harm you in defining my boundries. In short, either you want to go to the lake or you want to talk to me or you don't. I'ts as simple as that. Maybe you need a hug? Can I offer you a proverbial glass of tea or cup of cocoa? coffee, rum ? A slice of pie?
[FairfieldLife] New Crop Circle; West Overton, Wiltshire. Reported 9th August.
Images John Montgomery Copyright 2009 http://www.cccvault.com/cccvideos/trailer09c.html CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST CROP CIRCLE CONNECTOR DVD http://www.cccvault.com/cccvideos/trailer09c.html Images Lucy Pringle http://www.lucypringle.co.uk/ Copyright 2009 http://www.thecropcircleshop.com/ Make a donation to keep the web site alive... Thank you Image Copyright 2009
[FairfieldLife] Re: Make Your Own FFL Movies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Bhairitu wrote: If you can type you can make a movie: http://www.xtranormal.com/ I've made a number of 3D movies, some on YouTube. Those used iClone or MovieStorm both are somewhat difficult to use. Haven't done one with this yet but it looks much simpler and you can use it for free. I can about image the kind of movies FFL'ers will come up with. Let'er roll! Here's my first attempt. Unfortunately the voices are more robotic than I'd like but that is the state of artificial voice at the moment. http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090807173336103 Cool. I want to make one of a giant twinkie and then make it eat itself. That would be entertainment. You can't do that with their free current software. Maybe with the desktop version which you can get for subscribing for a year for $40 though I don't think that ability is there yet. I may bite on the $40 a year thing to do the animations on my desktop much faster than online. Plus you can use your own voice, sound effects and audio. Maybe even author your own sets. Currently you can do what you want with Anime Studio which is Manga type animation program. One has to be an artist to use it though. The lite version is $50 though I was able to buy after rebate for $10. Haven't done that much with it though I'll use it for some fun animations to send friends. Back in the early 1990's Microsoft came out with a program called 3D Movie Maker (actually they bought it from a small company). That program got it right as far as making little 3D animations easily. Unfortunately it came out at a time where making video files and distributing them online was yet possible since most people did not have that bandwidth and computers could only display postage stamp size videos. Instead the program generate an .exe which would play the animation and could be put on floppy. Programs like Poser, iClone and MovieStorm do character animation. Poser has become a means for people making 3D porn because they've gone for realism and anatomically correct models. I talked once with the program's producer who knew damn well they were selling lots of copies just for that. Poser has a frustrating interface by Kai (don't remember his last name) and it is easy to mess up a model animation. iClone is easier to use but also going for more realism but their product has always been unbalanced and they provide a well balanced set of props, etc. Fine if you want to do rap videos or dragon fantasies. MovieStorm is free and somewhat easy to use. I can be easier to set up shots and create sets. While Poser and iClone can import 3D models from other sources and MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that. Also Poser and iClone allow for models with custom faces. IOW, you can put a friend's face on a model and have them do ridiculous things. MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that ability. As a programmer I've been tempted to build my own. Movie directors hire 3D animation house to do pre-viz animations of their movie. Most of these house use 3D Studio, an expensive program originally created by AutoDesk. But the pre-vis often to save time and expense use very basic un-realistic models. What I wanted to do was build a program that could do the un-realistic modeling. Artists want the realism but people who want to create a small video to put on YouTube don't need it. This also seems what the Xtranormal people discovered. How hard is it to build your own? I mean for YOU to build your own, I can't even keep my buttons in my blackberry. But personally, I would be fascinated to see what you could do with it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is It Just Me?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: Is It Just Me? http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=25088 by John Cole [i-see-stupid-people] Is it just me, or does everything just seem stupider than normal this August recess? Between Mouthpiece Theater and the Atlantic phoning it in and Alessandra Stanley making a mistake every sentence and morons getting caught while taking a luxurious stroll through Iraq and wingnuts threatening congressmen because they are trying to reform health care and congressmen whinging about empathy and racist latinas on and on and on, it just seems like everything is dumber this summer. And I say that knowing full well that last August brought us Sarah Palin. Times like this, there really is only one thing that can cheer me up: [goinggalt1] I feel better. http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=25088 LMAO, No, we've been doing these things for a long time. I think your just more sensitive to it this summer. I think, probably, the stupid things have come down to where they can be listed and counted whereas before who could bother ? It's like saying I have 34455654434567788765445676777 cookies fly to mars and get some, no one even pays attention. But if you say 'I have 983 cookies' people are like 'D@ that's a lot of cookies. Don't have to fly to mars or nothing.Or have a stroke from the news, just a little angina.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Peace of God'
Beautiful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Glenn Becks' anti-democratic, anti-American movement
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: ANSWERS BELOW, INTERSPERSED (READ TO THE END, PLEASE) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Maddow complains that Nazism is not a metaphor. Well, if she is unhappy with activists using Nazi or Hitler metaphors, she should first complain about the #1 website that has been using these very terms for the eight years that Bush was president ON A DAILY BASIS. I'm talking, of course, about the huffingtonpost.com, the left-wing Obama-supporting site. The following is an advanced google search on the words nazi or hitler appearing just on the huffingtonpost.com. Note that there are OVER 45,500 hits: http://tinyurl.com/mu6elw I looked through the first three pages of hits. Not one was to an article that used the terms about the Bush administration (although there were a couple of commenters who did). Who said anything about the hits belonging ONLY to the articles or the authors of the articles? Not me. BZZT. You said, ...she should first complain about the #1 website that has been using these very terms Case closed. No, not case closed. The term website as it refers to the huffingtonpost.com INCLUDES BLOGGERS AND COMMENTATORS ALIKE. Only in your weird language, Shemp. Nobody else would include commenters (not commenTAtors) in the website that has been using formulation. If what you meant is that a Hitler-Bush comparison has occasionally appeared in HuffPo's comments, you could easily have said that. But you were trying to make folks think it was HuffPo writers who were doing it (and that HuffPo was the #1 website doing it, and ON A DAILY BASIS, at that). Highlighting the occasional unacceptable comment on a blog as if it characterized the entire left (or right), or even just the blog it appears on, is a tactic known as cherry picking and is rejected by those (of the left OR right) with any intellectual honesty. Virtually any blog you can name, especially the big ones, that allows comments will have some comments from nutcases. That tells you exactly NOTHING about the the blog writers' predilections. You might make a case that a particular blog attracts a high percentage of nutcase commenters by tallying the percentage of nutcase comments, but that would be a near-impossible job with a blog as extensive as HuffPo over eight years. Again: If you want to document your claim that Maddow is a hypocrite for not criticizing HuffPo for using Nazi/Hitler terms to describe the Bush administration, you'll need to find at least a few blog posts/articles that do so (I'll let you off the hook for your ON A DAILY BASIS hyperbole). To use a Google search tallying the number of times Hitler or Nazi were used *somewhere* on the blog in *some* context and claim that tells you *anything at all* about the blog is patently absurd. I'm no fan of either HuffPo or Maddow, BTW. But in this case the hypocrites are those on the right who screamed bloody murder about an entry in a video contest for MoveOn.org that made a Hitler/Bush comparison (which was quickly taken down--the entries weren't prescreened) but think it's just fine for such prominent right-wing pundits as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter to make such comparisons to Obama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: anyone interested in throwing rocks in the lake and talking spiritual esoteric
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamayl...@... wrote: And as long as someone isn't going to 'unsubscribe' me without my consent, I'll probably be fine. And if they do unsubscribe me without my consent, well, I think I'll be fine then too. As one of the moderators, the only folks who I unsubscribe are spammers. Moderators receive an email notification whenever someone unsubscribes from FFL, and what Bhairitu was referring to is me relaying that info to FFL as a courtesy when someone makes a stink about FFL not meeting their expectations and then unsubscribes. Why should people waste their time trying to engage someone who has unsubscribed from the group?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance In discussing Hitler or the Nazis themselves, or in criticizing right-wingers for using the terms to describe those on the left, you mean. , how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Find *just one* instance of Arianna or any other HuffPo blogger using Hitler as a metaphor for Bush.
[FairfieldLife] What he's up against . . .
[500] - - And before I go about demonstrating how, sadly, easy it is to prove the dumbness dragging down our country, let me just say that ignorance has life and death consequences. On the eve of the Iraq War, 69% of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9/11. Four years later, 34% still did. Or take the health care debate we're presently having: members of Congress have recessed now so they can go home and listen to their constituents. An urge they should resist because their constituents don't know anything. At a recent town-hall meeting in South Carolina, a man stood up and told his Congressman to keep your government hands off my Medicare, which is kind of like driving cross country to protest highways. I'm the bad guy for saying it's a stupid country, yet polls show that a majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government, or explain what the Bill of Rights is. 24% could not name the country America fought in the Revolutionary War. More than two-thirds of Americans don't know what's in Roe v. Wade. Two-thirds don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does. Some of this stuff you should be able to pick up simply by being alive. You know, like the way the Slumdog kid knew about cricket. Not here. Nearly half of Americans don't know that states have two senators and more than half can't name their congressman. And among Republican governors, only 30% got their wife's name right on the first try. Sarah Palin says she would never apologize for America. Even though a Gallup poll says 18% of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth. No, they're not stupid. They're interplanetary mavericks. A third of Republicans believe Obama is not a citizen, and a third of Democrats believe that George Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which is an absurd sentence because it contains the words Bush and knowledge. People bitch and moan about taxes and spending, but they have no idea what their government spends money on. The average voter thinks foreign aid consumes 24% of our federal budget. It's actually less than 1%. . . ...And these are the idiots we want to weigh in on the minutia of health care policy? Please, this country is like a college chick after two Long Island Iced Teas: we can be talked into anything, like wars, and we can be talked out of anything, like health care. We should forget town halls, and replace them with study halls... ... And if you want to call me an elitist for this, I say thank you. Yes, I want decisions made by an elite group of people who know what they're talking about. That means Obama budget director Peter Orszag, not Sarah Palin. Which is the way our founding fathers wanted it. James Madison wrote that pure democracy doesn't work because there is nothing to check... an obnoxious individual. Then, in the margins, he doodled a picture of Joe the Plumber. Until we admit there are things we don't know, we can't even start asking the questions to find out. Until we admit that America can make a mistake, we can't stop the next one. A smart guy named Chesterton once said: My country, right or wrong is a thing no patriot would ever think of saying... It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.' To which most Americans would respond: Are you calling my mother a drunk? ~~ Bill Maher http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-smart-president_b_2539\ 96.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: I'm not a fan of the assholes at Daily Kos, but I dug one up that clearly shows how easily Obama can flip flop on the the public option. mcjoan says that Obama is for a robust public option and he believes him, but he also reports that Obama is Open to Co-ops in Place of Public Option. He thinks it's a terrible idea and so do I. It's not a great idea, but it's better than nothing and may be all we can get. I think Obama is seeing the handwriting on the wall. http://tinyurl.com/nxddqz http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/7/763238/-Obama-Open-to-Co-ops-in-Place-of-Public-Option --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Lots of rhetoric and diddly squat about a public option. I think he's describing what he's pretty sure he's going to get, and not promising anything he's uncertain about. The provisions he lists are just crucially important. Obama, outline is pretty sketchy, at best. Sheesh, it's only a five-minute radio address! There's so little there, there that no one can fault him if it blows up. Oh, yes, they can. The elements he cited will make a substantial difference, and if he can't get those through, we might as well forget the whole thing. My worry about any bill that passes without a public option, is that it will turn into an insurance industry feeding frenzy. Some co-op or other weasel invention either is unacceptable. We have to have a public option. Let's see what kind of co-op idea they come up with. There's lots of different possibilities. He's said over and over again that he would like a public option. I don't see any reason to think that he really *doesn't* want it. But there's *huge* opposition to it, and he'd rather get what he outlines here than have the whole thing go down in flames because he's insisted on a public option. Obama is in the middle of competing forces. He pleases them by talking out of both sides of his mouth. On the left he has activist pushing hard for a public option, and he's telling them to back off. Actually he isn't. He was speaking to Blue Dogs, trying to get some cooperation from them by showing them some sympathy, saying he wished the left wouldn't attack Democrats. But there have been no reports from activist organizations that they've been told to back off. The left's opponent is the insurance industry that helped put Obama in office. Now of these two masters, who has the most sway? I'd like to think it's the folks that voted for him not the folks who bought him. But as the saying goes, money talks. It's the *congresscritters* who have been bought. He's explicitly staked his presidency and his second term on health insurance reform, saying that's how folks should evaluate his effectiveness. snip lots of stuff I agree with I'd like to trust Obama a little more and give him the benefit of the doubt as you do, but history of flip flops tells me otherwise. I think it will be a lot more effective to lean on Congress than to dump on Obama, flip flops or no. I really don't think he knew what he was going to be up against; that's one big reason why I didn't support him over Hillary. He's having to punt his way through.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: Partial transcript: As we draw close to finalizing and passing real health insurance reform, the defenders of the Notice how Obama has shifted the discussion from health care reform to health INSURANCE reform. IMO the distinction is simply a weasel out of emphasizing health care. Oh, WAIT a minnit! That shift was deliberately designed to appeal to the public, for whom health *insurance* is the big bugaboo. The best health care in the world doesn't do you any good if you can't afford insurance or your insurance won't pay for it because you had a preexisting condition or once had a hangnail you didn't report on your application. We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance In discussing Hitler or the Nazis themselves, or in criticizing right-wingers for using the terms to describe those on the left, you mean. No, Judy, and if you read my post in response to you saying you only found a couple of those instances in the three pages you looked at in the google search (scroll down to the end of that post where I discuss it) you'll see that you yourself found, by extrapolation, thousands of instances of where left-wingers did it. , how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Find *just one* instance of Arianna or any other HuffPo blogger using Hitler as a metaphor for Bush. Why should I? My argument has always been that it was EITHER bloggers or commentators (i.e. readers or posters) who made the metaphors or comparisons, NOT just bloggers. PLUS: HuffPo is a MODERATED forum, so they are responsible for such appearances by their commentators. And you yourself found instances of it which you documented in a previous post of your's. If you're interested in knowing whether HuffPo bloggers made such metaphors, YOU look it up; don't put the onus on me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Go Ahead And Die! (Pirates Of The Health Care-ibean)
So, there's going to be a panel that decides who lives and who dies. Ruth wrote: This is not true... So, Ruth, you're opposed to the bill in the U.S. Senate and you're opposed to medical care rationing. Death and dying counseling would be unavailable in your health care plan. You've got no living will and you wouldn't approve of anyone pulling the plug on your Grandmother, even if there was no chance of a recovery, no matter how much it cost you or the American taxpayer.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Go Ahead And Die! (Pirates Of The Health Care-ibean)
So, there's going to be a panel that decides who lives and who dies. Bhairitu wrote: Do you want to be a vegatable, Willy? So, you're in favor of managed care and medical care rationing. A panel would decide when to pull the plug on your Granny or cut off her Oxy. And you're in favor of living wills. But you haven't read the bill that's in the Senate, but I'm the turnip?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Glenn Becks' anti-democratic, anti-American movement
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: ANSWERS BELOW, INTERSPERSED (READ TO THE END, PLEASE) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Maddow complains that Nazism is not a metaphor. Well, if she is unhappy with activists using Nazi or Hitler metaphors, she should first complain about the #1 website that has been using these very terms for the eight years that Bush was president ON A DAILY BASIS. I'm talking, of course, about the huffingtonpost.com, the left-wing Obama-supporting site. The following is an advanced google search on the words nazi or hitler appearing just on the huffingtonpost.com. Note that there are OVER 45,500 hits: http://tinyurl.com/mu6elw I looked through the first three pages of hits. Not one was to an article that used the terms about the Bush administration (although there were a couple of commenters who did). Who said anything about the hits belonging ONLY to the articles or the authors of the articles? Not me. BZZT. You said, ...she should first complain about the #1 website that has been using these very terms Case closed. No, not case closed. The term website as it refers to the huffingtonpost.com INCLUDES BLOGGERS AND COMMENTATORS ALIKE. Only in your weird language, Shemp. Nobody else would include commenters (not commenTAtors) in the website that has been using formulation. Disagree. HuffPo, as I mentioned, is moderated. And besides, Arianna's complaints weren't just directed at Limbaugh but at everyday citizens who used the comparison at the ObamaCare protests. Commentators are the equivalent to those citizens, just as bloggers are equivalent to Limbaugh. If what you meant is that a Hitler-Bush comparison has occasionally appeared in HuffPo's comments, you could easily have said that. Precisely, Judy, AND THAT WAS MY WHOLE POINT! Just as Arianna could have said that about the ObamaCare protesters. But she didn't, nor did Rachel Maddow. So using THEIR very own standard of non-disclosure, I did the same thing. But you were trying to make folks think it was HuffPo writers who were doing it (and that HuffPo was the #1 website doing it, and ON A DAILY BASIS, at that). Well, they are the #1 website doing it and, yes, it was on a daily basis. Forgetting about Nazi-laced words for the moment, their commentators AND bloggers use incredibly hateful language towards their political opponents. Have you ever read the HuffingtonPost? Highlighting the occasional unacceptable comment on a blog as if it characterized the entire left (or right), or even just the blog it appears on, is a tactic known as cherry picking and is rejected by those (of the left OR right) with any intellectual honesty. I agree totally...and that was the point I was making. But I was even MORE successful making it because I now have had YOU make it for me. Thanks. Virtually any blog you can name, especially the big ones, that allows comments will have some comments from nutcases. That tells you exactly NOTHING about the the blog writers' predilections. ...but it does tell you something about the people who run the website (i.e., ARianna). This is a heavily censored website where her bloggers are protected from mean-spirited attacks yet the subjects of her bloggers' and commentators' writings (e.g., Bush) are NEVER spared the poison of the pen. Don't take MY word for it, Judy: do a simple exercise. Make a comment about, say, Bush. And then in another post make the EXACT SAME comment about Obama. And then see what happens to each comment. Be sure to use very nasty language. You might make a case that a particular blog attracts a high percentage of nutcase commenters by tallying the percentage of nutcase comments, but that would be a near-impossible job with a blog as extensive as HuffPo over eight years. Again: If you want to document your claim that Maddow is a hypocrite for not criticizing HuffPo for using Nazi/Hitler terms to describe the Bush administration, you'll need to find at least a few blog posts/articles that do so (I'll let you off the hook for your ON A DAILY BASIS hyperbole). Sorry, Judy, the onus is on YOU to do that. 45,500 hits is an incredible number. You've only looked at 3 pages out of the total 4,550 pages (because google shows 10 results per page). And even in those 3 pages you found the types of metaphors/comparisons I was
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
Pretty good AP article summarizing where things stand now and emphasizing the consumer protections that almost everyone in Congress seems to agree should be in the bill (and are in all the various versions that have been put together at this point): http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090809/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_consumer_protections http://tinyurl.com/nvdgax --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: I'm not a fan of the assholes at Daily Kos, but I dug one up that clearly shows how easily Obama can flip flop on the the public option. mcjoan says that Obama is for a robust public option and he believes him, but he also reports that Obama is Open to Co-ops in Place of Public Option. He thinks it's a terrible idea and so do I. http://tinyurl.com/nxddqz http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/7/763238/-Obama-Open-to-Co-ops-in-Place-of-Public-Option
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance In discussing Hitler or the Nazis themselves, or in criticizing right-wingers for using the terms to describe those on the left, you mean. No, Judy, and if you read my post in response to you saying you only found a couple of those instances in the three pages you looked at in the google search (scroll down to the end of that post where I discuss it) you'll see that you yourself found, by extrapolation, thousands of instances of where left-wingers did it. Er, no, that was *your* extrapolation. But there's zero basis for it. , how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Find *just one* instance of Arianna or any other HuffPo blogger using Hitler as a metaphor for Bush. Why should I? Because *you made the claim*, doofus. No, I didn't; not just about HuffPo bloggers. Show me where I ever said that. Look, Judy, 45,500 hits is pretty hard even for you to parse. But you can keep trying if you want...but you're just making yourself look foolish.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
Bob Brigante wrote: What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenburg? One's a flaming Nazi gasbag, the other is a dirigible. You can tell when the liberals get really scared - they start calling their political opponents 'Nazis'.
[FairfieldLife] So you wanna talk about Hitler...
= My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? The incredible destruction and collapse of his beloved country and the extreme suffering and poverty it caused his family was always blamed on outsiders, the enemy who was lurking from all corners just to mess with his pure Germany. = A lot of great diaries have been written about the new meme by Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and the corporate anti health care enablers to call President Obama a racist and compare him to Adolf Hitler. The assessment of the situation ranges from the last wails of a dying breed http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/7/151250/6790 to fascism on the rise http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/8/763673/-Is-The-US-On-The-Brink-o\ f-Fascism%5Band-What-To-Do-About-it%5D . As a German, I'm not only part of my people's long collective struggle to come to grips with our past, but I have personally grappled with my own family history and how to approach a subject so fraught with emotion and almost mythical proportions. I am so reluctant and utterly shocked to even write in response to such a patently absurd comparison that borders on the mental fringes between frightfully deluded and clinically insane. However, as painful as it is, there are times when we are asked to fearlessly descend into the darkest corners of our consciousness in order to evolve and transcend, and this is one of those times. This is what a family stroll in the spring of 1940 looked like for my family: [ title=] That's my grandmother with my Dad, his brothers, accompanied by a nazi-uniformed family friend. I'm assuming the photo was taken by my grandfather. My father passed away last year, so when my brother and I cleaned out his apartment we came across a lot of old family history, somberly resting in dusty old albums and folders. See, on the one hand you just want it to go away and toss that whole rotten pile in the fire, never to be seen or thought about again. On the other hand, we cannot evolve toward being more kind and compassionate humans without facing our shadows. We must not be afraid lest we forget the lessons of the past. My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? The incredible destruction and collapse of his beloved country and the extreme suffering and poverty it caused his family was always blamed on outsiders, the enemy who was lurking from all corners just to mess with his pure Germany. [ title=] Thing is, my grandfather was a loving family man, with the sweetest wife you could imagine (grandma passed in 1984), raising four sons in the middle of death and destruction. I knew him to be a strong-willed man with a good sense of humor. A little intimidating for a child like myself, but also full of stories. I always enjoyed visiting my grandparents as a kid we would go sailing, hiking and camping and if it weren't for all the iron cross, eagle and swastika stickers on his bookshelf, I would consider my grandparents' house and family vibe completely normal. In other words, my grandfather was a HUMAN BEING. My dad, who went on to become a state judge in the Federal Republic of Germany, always told me that the one thing he just never understood about his father was his infatuation with that Nazi stuff. It never made any sense to him, considering how caring his father was. Here they are together in 1941... [ title=] I came of age in the late 1980s, during the height of anti-nuclear protests and acid rain in Germany. I learned extensively about the horrible crimes my country had committed against humanity in school. But when you're 17 or 18 you think what the hell does that have to do with me? There were plenty of problems going on right then and there, including a bunch of stupid skinheads and neo-Nazis that needed to be shouted down and opposed. Like many Germans regardless of their disposition, talking about our Nazi past felt like a dead end street that was inevitably bound for guilt and self-loathing. It took me a few more years and a long trip to India to understand that there was so much more to it than the old guilty vs not-guilty paradigm. During that time I allowed myself to go deeper into it which began with an acceptance of the Nazi seeds within me. You see, if my grandfather was a Nazi and I am his descendant, then surely I must have a Nazi seed within me as well. That thought was a bit salty at first, but the more I meditated
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
Judy wrote: Pretty good AP article... If a bill does pass, the biggest winners are likely to be self-employed people and small-business owners and employees, who now have the most trouble getting and keeping coverage. Those working for big companies would only benefit indirectly; they'd find it easier to keep their coverage if they get laid off or leave to launch a new career... 'Consumer protections lost in health care debate' By Ricardo lonzo-Zaldivar Associated Press, August 9, 2009 http://tinyurl.com/nvdgax
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? [snip] What's he talking about; the Nazis WERE socialists. Na and Zi are the two letters that stand for the German spelling of National Socialists. Sure, they fought and opposed the Bolsheviks...but this was pretty much a fight within the family, much the same way that the Stalinists fought the Trotskyites. Nazis were for the workers, social programs, and central control of the economy. So were the socialists and communists. They are all on the same spectrum; they only vary in the degrees and ways they all suppress people. It has been a myth and a creation of the Left since WWII to make the Nazis into some sort of right-wing opposite-of-socialism type of thing. They did that to distance themselves from the incredible similarities Nazism has to socialism (peas in a pod). Kinda like what the Democrats do today with their own history with the DixieCrats where they have successfully convinced the masses that it was the Republicans that supported segregation and Jim Crow when, of course, it was the Democrats who did...for over 100 years from the end of the Civil War to about 30 years ago.
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? [snip] What's he talking about; the Nazis WERE socialists. Na and Zi are the two letters that stand for the German spelling of National Socialists. Sure, they fought and opposed the Bolsheviks...but this was pretty much a fight within the family, much the same way that the Stalinists fought the Trotskyites. Nazis were for the workers, social programs, and central control of the economy. So were the socialists and communists. They are all on the same spectrum; they only vary in the degrees and ways they all suppress people. It has been a myth and a creation of the Left since WWII to make the Nazis into some sort of right-wing opposite-of-socialism type of thing. They did that to distance themselves from the incredible similarities Nazism has to socialism (peas in a pod). Only in the twisted little world of your mind, Shremp. Kinda like what the Democrats do today with their own history with the DixieCrats where they have successfully convinced the masses that it was the Republicans that supported segregation and Jim Crow when, of course, it was the Democrats who did...for over 100 years from the end of the Civil War to about 30 years ago. Bananas.
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
They did that to distance themselves from the incredible similarities Nazism has to socialism... John wrote: Bananas. It looks like Bob and John are really scared.
[FairfieldLife] Bollywood Hero
This is a 3 part mini-series on the IFC channel that played the other night but is also available OnDemand on Comcast and probably other cable companies. You may remember Chris Kattan from Saturday Night Live. In this show he plays an actor who takes a job in a Bollywood movie. It's a great comedy about the differences between Indian and American culture and the Bollywood scene. Lots of great scenes of Mumbai. http://www.ifc.com/bollywood-hero/ On Comcast look under their Cutting Edge section OnDemand section. Available in HD too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: More on the incredible clips from the Outnumbered TV series
There was an episode of 'Outnumbered' yesterday, I don't know whether or not you can see the re-run showing on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00fq31t --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Are the clips a true representation of what 'Outnumbered' is like? Hugh Dennis appears on comedy quiz programs quite a lot, and is part of a generation of very funny gifted comedians here, there seems to be a glut of them, we are very lucky. I came across 'Outnumbered' by chance and found it to be totally gripping, but I can't define why. It isn't as cerebral as Monty Python, Not the Nine O'clock News or any of the other greats, but it has its own power to put our lives on parade. From what I understand, the cast is left to improvise quite a lot, so perhaps that is why the material feels so fresh? Well, the kids are incredibly and if, indeed, the kids are ad-libbing, they are masters at it. The little boy and little girl are perfect. And it's their sincerity that does it; they aren't trying to be cutesy-wootsy or funny. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: I'll tell you what I love about the 3 clips I've seen so far. Firstly, there's no laugh track which more often than not absolutely kills any comedy for me (and a laugh track is to be differentiated from the laughing from a live studio audience DURING the taping of a show). Secondly, this is NOT slap-your-knee funny; it is situational funny, for lack of a better term. I much prefer this kind of comedy. The best example of it that I know is the movie Flirting with distaster with Ben Stiller and Patricia Arquette. Thirdly, the kids who are the actors -- as well as the adults -- are not TRYING to play funny; they are reading and acting their lines quite sincerely and it is the situation itself and the script which is just incredibly hilarious. There is an axiom in Hollywood that if you're an actor doing a comedy, you don't try and play funny; you do the lines and your role as seriously and sincerely as possible, the funny will automatically come. And that's why I think this works. In the Awkward questions about Jesus clip, everyone in it is doing that perfectly from the Vicar (who's wonderful) to all of the kids. This is a gem of a series and I can't wait until it is available on DVD in the States! Of course, the series could be shit and we are just seeing the absolute best of it...but somehow I doubt it. Perhaps Paul Mason who is ensconced in Jolly Old England sees the series? Could he please tell us whether the series is as good as the clips? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 no_reply@ wrote: No holds barred comedy. OMG, OMG, OMG!! I can barely breath this is so funny http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al3CCSEl-fMNR=1 .. if it goes to hell it can have cheese on toast Followed by this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45ZdXr--4QAfeature=related In sickness#65279; or in health. May the force be with you..because you're worth it I think I'd die of laughter if I watched a whole show.
[FairfieldLife] Re: More on the incredible clips from the Outnumbered TV series
There was an episode of 'Outnumbered' yesterday, I don't know whether or not you in the US can see the re-run showing on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00fq31t --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandp...@... wrote: There was an episode of 'Outnumbered' yesterday, I don't know whether or not you can see the re-run showing on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00fq31t --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Are the clips a true representation of what 'Outnumbered' is like? Hugh Dennis appears on comedy quiz programs quite a lot, and is part of a generation of very funny gifted comedians here, there seems to be a glut of them, we are very lucky. I came across 'Outnumbered' by chance and found it to be totally gripping, but I can't define why. It isn't as cerebral as Monty Python, Not the Nine O'clock News or any of the other greats, but it has its own power to put our lives on parade. From what I understand, the cast is left to improvise quite a lot, so perhaps that is why the material feels so fresh? Well, the kids are incredibly and if, indeed, the kids are ad-libbing, they are masters at it. The little boy and little girl are perfect. And it's their sincerity that does it; they aren't trying to be cutesy-wootsy or funny. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: I'll tell you what I love about the 3 clips I've seen so far. Firstly, there's no laugh track which more often than not absolutely kills any comedy for me (and a laugh track is to be differentiated from the laughing from a live studio audience DURING the taping of a show). Secondly, this is NOT slap-your-knee funny; it is situational funny, for lack of a better term. I much prefer this kind of comedy. The best example of it that I know is the movie Flirting with distaster with Ben Stiller and Patricia Arquette. Thirdly, the kids who are the actors -- as well as the adults -- are not TRYING to play funny; they are reading and acting their lines quite sincerely and it is the situation itself and the script which is just incredibly hilarious. There is an axiom in Hollywood that if you're an actor doing a comedy, you don't try and play funny; you do the lines and your role as seriously and sincerely as possible, the funny will automatically come. And that's why I think this works. In the Awkward questions about Jesus clip, everyone in it is doing that perfectly from the Vicar (who's wonderful) to all of the kids. This is a gem of a series and I can't wait until it is available on DVD in the States! Of course, the series could be shit and we are just seeing the absolute best of it...but somehow I doubt it. Perhaps Paul Mason who is ensconced in Jolly Old England sees the series? Could he please tell us whether the series is as good as the clips? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 no_reply@ wrote: No holds barred comedy. OMG, OMG, OMG!! I can barely breath this is so funny http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al3CCSEl-fMNR=1 .. if it goes to hell it can have cheese on toast Followed by this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45ZdXr--4QAfeature=related In sickness#65279; or in health. May the force be with you..because you're worth it I think I'd die of laughter if I watched a whole show.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Make Your Own FFL Movies
mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Bhairitu wrote: If you can type you can make a movie: http://www.xtranormal.com/ I've made a number of 3D movies, some on YouTube. Those used iClone or MovieStorm both are somewhat difficult to use. Haven't done one with this yet but it looks much simpler and you can use it for free. I can about image the kind of movies FFL'ers will come up with. Let'er roll! Here's my first attempt. Unfortunately the voices are more robotic than I'd like but that is the state of artificial voice at the moment. http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090807173336103 Cool. I want to make one of a giant twinkie and then make it eat itself. That would be entertainment. You can't do that with their free current software. Maybe with the desktop version which you can get for subscribing for a year for $40 though I don't think that ability is there yet. I may bite on the $40 a year thing to do the animations on my desktop much faster than online. Plus you can use your own voice, sound effects and audio. Maybe even author your own sets. Currently you can do what you want with Anime Studio which is Manga type animation program. One has to be an artist to use it though. The lite version is $50 though I was able to buy after rebate for $10. Haven't done that much with it though I'll use it for some fun animations to send friends. Back in the early 1990's Microsoft came out with a program called 3D Movie Maker (actually they bought it from a small company). That program got it right as far as making little 3D animations easily. Unfortunately it came out at a time where making video files and distributing them online was yet possible since most people did not have that bandwidth and computers could only display postage stamp size videos. Instead the program generate an .exe which would play the animation and could be put on floppy. Programs like Poser, iClone and MovieStorm do character animation. Poser has become a means for people making 3D porn because they've gone for realism and anatomically correct models. I talked once with the program's producer who knew damn well they were selling lots of copies just for that. Poser has a frustrating interface by Kai (don't remember his last name) and it is easy to mess up a model animation. iClone is easier to use but also going for more realism but their product has always been unbalanced and they provide a well balanced set of props, etc. Fine if you want to do rap videos or dragon fantasies. MovieStorm is free and somewhat easy to use. I can be easier to set up shots and create sets. While Poser and iClone can import 3D models from other sources and MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that. Also Poser and iClone allow for models with custom faces. IOW, you can put a friend's face on a model and have them do ridiculous things. MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that ability. As a programmer I've been tempted to build my own. Movie directors hire 3D animation house to do pre-viz animations of their movie. Most of these house use 3D Studio, an expensive program originally created by AutoDesk. But the pre-vis often to save time and expense use very basic un-realistic models. What I wanted to do was build a program that could do the un-realistic modeling. Artists want the realism but people who want to create a small video to put on YouTube don't need it. This also seems what the Xtranormal people discovered. How hard is it to build your own? I mean for YOU to build your own, I can't even keep my buttons in my blackberry. But personally, I would be fascinated to see what you could do with it. It would not be easy but 26 years of programming experience helps. One doesn't need to create the 3D engine just use OpenGL.
[FairfieldLife] Outstanding description of *Brahm*...as used by MMY, IMO.
(9) The terms atma and brahm in the Upnishads. The word atma technically means `the Divinity'. So, in the Upnishads, except for a few places, the word atma has been generally used for God, the absolute Divinity, like: Brihadaranyak Upnishad says, The supreme Divinity (God) should be desired by a soul to be visualized. Aitreya Upnishad says, The supreme Divinity (God) existed before the creation of this universe. The word brahm means the absolute Divinity Who is absolutely great and makes a soul great like Himself after God realization. In the Upnishads the term brahm mostly refers to the personal form of God and occasionally to the impersonal (nirakar) aspect of God, just like the verse 7 in the Mandukyopnishad. The reason is that the nirakar aspect of God or nirakar brahm is formless and actionless and so it cannot even Grace the souls or become the creator of the universe or do any other thing of any kind. It is only the `purush,' the personal form of God, Who does all those things. The Upnishads describe the Gracious kindness of God awarding liberation and His abode to the souls, and the creation of the universe etc. This is the work of the personal God only, that's why there is very little description of the nirakar (actionless) brahm in them. The most important thing is that nirakar brahm, being an existence of absolutely dormant virtues (avyakt shaktik), can never even manifest its Blissfulness. It is like the subtle dormant state of the beauty of a flower that dormantly exists in its seed that has not even taken the shape of a plant. So, wherever the Upnishads talk about the Divine knowledge or Bliss (chidanand) of brahm, they only refer to the personal form of God and not the nirakar brahm. The Upnishads mostly use pronouns when referring to God, like, sah (He), ishah (controller God), purushah (personal God), and tasya (His) etc. However, there are a number of Upnishads like Tripadvibhushit Maha Narayanopnishad, Gopal Tapiniyopnishad, Krishnopnishad etc., which directly relate to the personal form of God and they clearly indicate that nirakar brahm is established in the personal form of God. So, personal form is the main form of God. There is one more point that sometimes confuses the intellectuals. The Upnishads sometimes tell, which literally means that the one who receives liberation becomes Narain or the one who receives liberation becomes brahm. That's true, but the Upnishad further says, which means that no one could be absolutely equal to God. This situation is clarified by the producer of the Vedas, Bhagwan Ved Vyas himself. He says in the Brahm Sutra, that the synonymity of a liberated soul does not synonymize him with the functions of God, like the creation, protection and destruction of the universe, or His absolute omnipresence etc. It only relates with the Blissful synonymity of the form of God he has attained. It means that, upon God realization, the worshipper of the nirakar brahm enters the absolutely dormant state of the Divinity called kaivalya mokch and stays there forever in a kind of totally passed out state, because the nirakar brahm itself is an actionless dormant Divinity. The worshipper of God Vishnu, upon God realization, experiences the same kind and the amount of the Divine Bliss which God Vishnu Himself experiences in His abode, and so do the worshippers of Bhagwan Ram and Krishn. Isn't it the incomparable unlimited loving Grace of God, Who awards His limitless personal Love and Bliss to a maya-inflicted soul who has committed uncountable transgressions and has accumulated uncountable sins in past unlimited lifetimes? Yet, the souls are so gross-headed that, ignoring His unlimited love, Grace and kindness, they remain engrossed in their material activities and lose the golden opportunity of having a human life which is the only hope of receiving His Grace and becoming His loving one forever.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nelson Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 6:37 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 11:34 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk Herbert obviously has a gun-control agenda and that's all very well and good. But, hey, Timothy McVeigh had a great hatred for the U.S. Government and he didn't use ANY guns in expressing that hatredall he needed was some fertilizer...and hundreds died. Guns are really beside the point. Where do you draw the line, Shemp? Automatic weapons? Assault rifles? Bazookas? Suitcase nukes? The more powerful the weapon, the easier it is to kill lots of people with it. Laws are meant to restrict individual liberties to the extent necessary to prevent harm to other individuals. By that definition, gun laws are too lax. +++ To the criminal element, laws are meaningless and only create more burden for good citizens. I assume it's illegal to buy all the components McVeigh used to build his bomb, or at least it's necessary to show proof of why you need to buy them, such as blasting caps. Would you agree that certain weapons should be unobtainable, and/or that ownership of any weapon should require registration at least as onerous as a driver's license? Some very serious stuff can be made out of supplies found at the local supermarket and hardware store. You can kill someone with a hammer, or a pencil for that matter. But it's easier and more impersonal with a gun. And the more powerful the weapon, the easier it is to kill more people. But hey, since the constitutional justification for owning guns is to maintain a standing militia, presumably to repel British invasion or Indian attacks in the absence of a professional military, and since these days foreign invasion could come in the form of nuclear missiles, to be true to the Constitution everyone should be able to own a nuclear missile.
[FairfieldLife] Beach Boys Concert in Fairfield
enjoy ... Following the great success of the “Paul McCartney and Friends” concert at Radio City Music Hall in April, the David Lynch Foundation is creating a series of concert events to increase support and awareness for its campaign to teach the Transcendental Meditation technique to a million at-risk youth around the world. The first of these events will feature the Beach Boys in their first ever concert in Fairfield, Iowa—the home of Maharishi University of Management—September 7th, the Monday of Labor Day Weekend. Come and join us for this end of the summer celebration. THE GRAND FINALE OF THEIR ENDLESS SUMMER TOUR LABOR DAY MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2009 2:00 pm (Doors Open at Noon) Fairfield Middle School Outdoor Field (404 W. Fillmore) TICKETS Lawn seating prices range from $12 to $22 Reserved chair seating starts at $37.50 ADVANCE SALES Online at www.fairfieldacc.com or by calling: 641-472-ARTS (2787) FOR VIP/CORPORATE PACKAGES AND GROUP SALES Click Here or call 866-962-0108 Come early, bring your beach blankets chairs for a Labor Day picnic. Food and beverages will be available on site The Beach Boys are finishing up their red-hot summer tour of 40 American cities that has been drawing huge audiences and rave reviews. Mark your calendar and get ready for Good Vibrations as Mike Love The Beach Boys bring their summer classics and amazing harmonies to Fairfield. Co-sponsored by the Fairfield Convention Visitors Bureau, the Fairfield Arts and Convention Center, and the David Lynch Foundation Copyright 2009, David Lynch Foundation. All rights reserved. This message was sent from The David Lynch Foundation to vedamer...@yahoo.de. It was sent from: David Lynch Foundation TV, 1000 N. 4th Street, Fairfield, IA 52557. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below. Email Marketing by To be removed click here
Re: [FairfieldLife] Fucking hypocrite Huffington
shempmcgurk wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance, how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Shemp. Limbaugh is a page right out of Goebbel's propaganda book. He is a loon being used to brainwash and program the useful idiots to give rise to a corporate form of communism which can also be called fascism. As for Arianna, you might like what she had to say on Bill Maher's show the other night about what was missing from the health reform bill and that is preventative medicine and the rest of the panel including the two Republican congressmen agreed with her. I do too. This bill will not be acceptable in any way if it is just big pharma medicine and I will probably run afoul of it. I did a search on the whole health bill PDF for preventative, alternative and turned up nothing. I'm afraid we'll get a mediocre form and unacceptable health reform program probably still benefiting the organized crime syndicate that runs the medical industrial complex.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 12:53 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Hi Judy, You beat me to it. I was going to post Violet Sock's blog about this story which she says the media pretty much buried. Her take on it is that the dudes don't see it as a hate crime. I'm glad to see Bob Herbert write about it. That's the main reason I posted it. Some of the men on this forum seem to think the misogyny in this country and the resulting violence against women is just a feminist victim fantasy. Judy, the dudes on FFLife are a riot. Shemp shifts the conversation from Women at Risk to gun control. Then, without any irony he says, Guns are really beside the point. I'm still laughing. Rick gets into it with Shemp about lax gun control laws. He hits all the leftwing talking points denouncing: automatic weapons, assault rifles, bazookas, suitcase nukes and blasting caps. Does he denounce misogyny if given the opportunity? Of course he doesn't. An argument about gun control with Shemp is more important to him. Do we all have to chime in every time the misogyny topic comes up? Does my addressing the gun law issue instead of the topic of the thread mean I'm a misogynist? Have I said anything else to indicate that I am? I concur with your concerns, but I feel that you address them far more eloquently than I would be able to. I don't have as much time to post as some people here do, and I could never write posts as long as some do, so I don't comment on every post that shows up.
[FairfieldLife] Deeksha
The main dude in town, Zanek?? Overtly cut in front of me the other day at the bank...lol? I mentioned it and he turned to me and with that absurd smile said, I won't be long. I was in severe back pain and and in a hurry. Normally, I'd never think again about it...but it seems so typical of the roos in general and a big shot Deeksha guy...was an ass. Period/ and to me, proof, once again of the lie of all these silly techniquesIve had Deeksha and it was literally zero.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Partial transcript: As we draw close to finalizing and passing real health insurance reform, the defenders of the Notice how Obama has shifted the discussion from health care reform to health INSURANCE reform. IMO the distinction is simply a weasel out of emphasizing health care. Oh, WAIT a minnit! That shift was deliberately designed to appeal to the public, for whom health *insurance* is the big bugaboo. The best health care in the world doesn't do you any good if you can't afford insurance or your insurance won't pay for it because you had a preexisting condition or once had a hangnail you didn't report on your application. We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip My argument with reframing is that it waters down the issue when Obama doesn't have to. He doesn't need to pretty the pig to please folks who are misinformed He needs to educate them. And for god's sake, call off the leftwing attack dogs saying people who question health care stupid, Nazi, racists. Of course there are loudmouths at town halls but it shuts down dialogue when you paint everyone with the same brush. The rhetoric on both sides is so inflamed it's impossible to have a sane conversation. It plays right into the hands of the people who don't want a public option, the insurance companies. Obama needs to get in everyone's face about the fact that healthcare with a public option is less expensive. Not a word. He needs to tell people the majority of people want a public option. Not a word. He needs to come up with a plan of his own, something simple and understandable, like reducing the eligibility age for medicare. Not a word. If he were honest he would say, Kiss your public option and cheaper healthcare goodbye. I'm in the pocket of the insurance folks, roll over so they can screw you. Black Agenda Report: The same Barack Obama who was swept in by tens of millions wanting change, accepted $19 million in 2008 from the insurance industry alone, according to the Center For Responsive Politics. This does not include additional contributions from the health care and pharmaceutical industries, or any of the vast sums coming directly from the law firms and relatives of their lobbyists, or directly from lobbyists themselves as so-called small individual contributions. This ain't chump change. Obama made a Faustian deal and we're going to pay for it. A word about co-ops: They suck. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/103439/462 A word about telling the left to back off: Judy wrote: But there have been no reports from activist organizations that they've been told to back off. Violet puts that illusion to rest, quoting Jane Hamsher quoting potty mouth Rahm Emanuel: On Tuesday, Common Purpose held its weekly meeting where lobbyist Erik Smith and a comm person from the White House tell liberal interest groups what they should be saying that week. Then if anyone gets out of line, they kick their asses. Along with Unity 09 and the 8:45 am call, they exist to form a solid left flank and keep the White House immune from liberal criticism. I like to call them collectively the veal pen. Rahm unleashed a tirade on them all, telling them that they were going to fuck up the Democrats if we failed to pass any old health care bill (which appears now to be the health insurance industry approved co-ops). But I doubt you'll hear any of them confirming that the White House hasn't pressured them to stop their attacks on Democrats any time soon, because it came in the form of a flying shit fit at top volume with four-letter verbiage liberally applied. http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/08/08/welcome-charlie-foxtrot/ In all this I keep thinking, if Hillary were still in the Senate, she would probably have given Max Baucus holy hell for taking the public option off the table right from the git go. It's makes me wonder if appointing her to SOS was a way to shut her up. She is passionate about healhcare reform. I don't think she ever referred to it as insurance reform. Good for her.
[FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency
I don't think Michael Vick should have spent a day in prison. Needless to say, I think what he did to those dogs was horrific and he should have paid some penalty for it. But I'll tell you why I don't think he should have spent a minute in prison. We are a society that eats animals. Not by the thousands. Not by the millions. Not by the tens of millions. BUT BY THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS EACH YEAR! We use cows, for example, to give us what is arguably the most complete, perfect food -- milk, just like from our own mothers -- and then as a reward for nourishing us, we bring her to a slaughterhouse, at the end of her usefulness as a reservoir of milk, where we first subject her cerebral cortex to a jolt of electricity from a prod in order to brain-kill her and then proceed to cut off her head, chop her up into little pieces, mince her, and then proceed to eat her in the next day's Big Mac. HOW IS THAT ANY LESS BARBARIC THAN WHAT MICHAEL VICK DID TO THOSE DOGS? At least he wasn't a hypocrite about it and butchered the poor animals with by his own hand. We, on the other hand, consume our meats neatly laid out before us without any clue as to the torture and vileness that we had subjected the animal to both during and at the end of its life. I actually have more respect for hunters who hunt and kill deer or whatever because at least those animals had a life in the wild before they were killed. And the hunter actually gets down and does the dirty work of both killing and, often, cutting the animal up (although the butchering is usually left to a professional). But in over 98% of the cases, the hunter and his family eat the animal they have killed.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 3:16 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency I don't think Michael Vick should have spent a day in prison. Needless to say, I think what he did to those dogs was horrific and he should have paid some penalty for it. But I'll tell you why I don't think he should have spent a minute in prison. We are a society that eats animals. Not by the thousands. Not by the millions. Not by the tens of millions. BUT BY THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS EACH YEAR! We use cows, for example, to give us what is arguably the most complete, perfect food -- milk, just like from our own mothers -- and then as a reward for nourishing us, we bring her to a slaughterhouse, at the end of her usefulness as a reservoir of milk, where we first subject her cerebral cortex to a jolt of electricity from a prod in order to brain-kill her and then proceed to cut off her head, chop her up into little pieces, mince her, and then proceed to eat her in the next day's Big Mac. HOW IS THAT ANY LESS BARBARIC THAN WHAT MICHAEL VICK DID TO THOSE DOGS? At least he wasn't a hypocrite about it and butchered the poor animals with by his own hand. We, on the other hand, consume our meats neatly laid out before us without any clue as to the torture and vileness that we had subjected the animal to both during and at the end of its life. I actually have more respect for hunters who hunt and kill deer or whatever because at least those animals had a life in the wild before they were killed. And the hunter actually gets down and does the dirty work of both killing and, often, cutting the animal up (although the butchering is usually left to a professional). But in over 98% of the cases, the hunter and his family eat the animal they have killed. I especially agree with your last paragraph. And we have at least one such person on this forum (Alex), although I think he has a professional butcher them. I agree that there's a fine line between what Vick did and what happens in commercial animal husbandry, the distinction being that Vick was intentionally torturing them for entertainment while the meat industry raises them for profit and people do need to eat. But the lives of the animals involved are often as horrific as those of Vick's dogs. Both examples are symptomatic of the barbarism of our society. We're not as civilized as we like to think we are.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why are we allowing pornography to be posted here?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bmorry2000 bmorry2...@... wrote: I just read message #73263. What is there pornography in this group? Even though I can intellectually see the transcendental value, I am still offended by it Moderator, where are you??? DANGIT Pornography in FFL? well how come I can't find it. . . . this isn't fair. Its seems to have been deleted. LMAOAMW (laughin...@ssoffamillionways)
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? ** I just finished a 985 pg book, The Kindly Ones, the fictional memoirs of a switchhitting SS officer tasked with various jobs mostly involved with ethnic cleansing of the other in the East. Does a good job of showing how educated people (the fictional author, although he is a psychopath, has a doctorate) managed to resolve their feelings about killing with the goals of the Nazi party (I am not implying that your family was somehow involved in the killings). http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
Sorry, Shemp, this is just too inane a discussion to continue. Why on earth don't you use your ingenuity and persistence in trying to justify obviously ridiculous arguments to make *good, solid* arguments about things you're for or against? Trolling doesn't get you anywhere; it just destroys your credibility so nobody takes you seriously even when you have a legitimate point to make. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance In discussing Hitler or the Nazis themselves, or in criticizing right-wingers for using the terms to describe those on the left, you mean. No, Judy, and if you read my post in response to you saying you only found a couple of those instances in the three pages you looked at in the google search (scroll down to the end of that post where I discuss it) you'll see that you yourself found, by extrapolation, thousands of instances of where left-wingers did it. Er, no, that was *your* extrapolation. But there's zero basis for it. , how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Find *just one* instance of Arianna or any other HuffPo blogger using Hitler as a metaphor for Bush. Why should I? Because *you made the claim*, doofus. No, I didn't; not just about HuffPo bloggers. Show me where I ever said that. Look, Judy, 45,500 hits is pretty hard even for you to parse. But you can keep trying if you want...but you're just making yourself look foolish.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Sorry, Shemp, this is just too inane a discussion to continue. Why on earth don't you use your ingenuity and persistence in trying to justify obviously ridiculous arguments to make *good, solid* arguments about things you're for or against? Trolling doesn't get you anywhere; it just destroys your credibility so nobody takes you seriously even when you have a legitimate point to make. 45,500 reasons to disagree with you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Speaking of the huffingtonpost.com allowing their site to publish the words hitler and nazi over 45,500 times since they came into existance In discussing Hitler or the Nazis themselves, or in criticizing right-wingers for using the terms to describe those on the left, you mean. No, Judy, and if you read my post in response to you saying you only found a couple of those instances in the three pages you looked at in the google search (scroll down to the end of that post where I discuss it) you'll see that you yourself found, by extrapolation, thousands of instances of where left-wingers did it. Er, no, that was *your* extrapolation. But there's zero basis for it. , how's this for chutzpah: Arianna complaining about Rush Limbaugh using hitler as a metaphor: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-on-real-time-with_b_254632.html Find *just one* instance of Arianna or any other HuffPo blogger using Hitler as a metaphor for Bush. Why should I? Because *you made the claim*, doofus. No, I didn't; not just about HuffPo bloggers. Show me where I ever said that. Look, Judy, 45,500 hits is pretty hard even for you to parse. But you can keep trying if you want...but you're just making yourself look foolish.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: From the New York Times: August 8, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Women at Risk By BOB HERBERT I actually look good. I dress good, am clean- shaven, bathe, touch of cologne yet 30 million women rejected me, wrote George Sodini in a blog that he kept while preparing for this week's shooting in a Pennsylvania gym in which he killed three women, wounded nine others and then killed himself. We've seen this tragic ritual so often that it has the feel of a formula. A guy is filled with a seething rage toward women and has easy access to guns. The result: mass slaughter We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment. The mainstream culture is filled with the most gruesome forms of misogyny, and pornography is now a multibillion-dollar industry much of it controlled by mainstream U.S. corporations. One of the striking things about mass killings in the U.S. is how consistently we find that the killers were riddled with shame and sexual humiliation, which they inevitably blamed on women and girls. The answer to their feelings of inadequacy was to get their hands on a gun (or guns) and begin blowing people away Life in the United States is mind-bogglingly violent. But we should take particular notice of the staggering amounts of violence brought down on the nation's women and girls each and every day for no other reason than who they are. They are attacked because they are female We would become much more sane, much healthier, as a society if we could bring ourselves to acknowledge that misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem, and that the twisted way so many men feel about women, combined with the absurdly easy availability of guns, is a toxic mix of the most tragic proportions. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/opinion/08herbert.html?_r=1 http://tinyurl.com/nazqyf Well, seems in all fairness I should mention that the the rape, murder and humiliation of EVERYONE is just great entertainment in the media. We kill millions of more men in movies then women, not only that, but we kill them en mass in the movies, and war? DAYAM, we have to FIGHT for the RIGHT to go be killed in war, as a woman,LOL. When we do kill a woman in the movies it's all special and slow like it is a grand event. Just like this poor mentally Ill guy, made a HUGE deal out of it, poor bastard, killed himself too, he didn't die without the female sex however, men, its no big deal to kill in the movies we apparently feel, or anywhere else. Women and children, thats who we shouldn't kill. C'mon, talk about sexism, we can just pop men off like scattering seeds in a field. No wonder poor guys feel a little pissed off. Having said that, What about the true humiliation we do to women? I am a woman.Have you driven by the square? I just feel like running something over every time I see those stupid dolls. Not that I dislike dolls, not that they aren't pretty, but has any one THOUGHT about what they represent? And in a nice way on top of it all? Let's examine this, it is a symbol of a woman, boobs, fashion clothes, and any old dayam thing you can find to stick out of its head, a shoe, a stick, it doesn't matter. Cuz the important parts are there, she is skewered on a stick so she can't leave, she has no power (legs) and she is dressed to be pretty for us,nice boobs very visible, with a hat with no head for it, do we REALLY REALLY REALLY get what is humiliating about what society tells us we are as women? Fawk, its a miracle we aren't mowing MEN down in the gyms. But I'll bet 3 ass hairs it's a woman who created those 'pwetty wittle dolls' up there. It's the woman who says who REALLY lives and dies. Untill maybe 150 yrs ago if a mother of an infant died,that baby died too, unless ANOTHER nursing mother could be found or by a small chance some goat or cow milk would help that baby. The ONLY way a man CAN dominate us is by making us think GOD made it that way, cuz the truth is, we can go amazon anytime. You take control and tell your baby boys how to treat you as a mother and viola, problem solved for all society. It is the hurt from the IMBALANCE of this unnatural skewering of both men AND women. It doesn't matter who is off in the ying and yang,they will both be out of their true inner power if the whole gets imbalanced. I don't want my baby boy to die any more then I want my baby girl to die, call it his honor or his JOB to DIE or call it what you will, I WILL THROW MYSELF IN FRONT OF A BULLET FOR MY BABY BOY ANY DAY ! ! ! And that is my honor. Put that up on the fucking square. Give
[FairfieldLife] Re: Make Your Own FFL Movies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: mirza wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Bhairitu wrote: If you can type you can make a movie: http://www.xtranormal.com/ I've made a number of 3D movies, some on YouTube. Those used iClone or MovieStorm both are somewhat difficult to use. Haven't done one with this yet but it looks much simpler and you can use it for free. I can about image the kind of movies FFL'ers will come up with. Let'er roll! Here's my first attempt. Unfortunately the voices are more robotic than I'd like but that is the state of artificial voice at the moment. http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090807173336103 Cool. I want to make one of a giant twinkie and then make it eat itself. That would be entertainment. You can't do that with their free current software. Maybe with the desktop version which you can get for subscribing for a year for $40 though I don't think that ability is there yet. I may bite on the $40 a year thing to do the animations on my desktop much faster than online. Plus you can use your own voice, sound effects and audio. Maybe even author your own sets. Currently you can do what you want with Anime Studio which is Manga type animation program. One has to be an artist to use it though. The lite version is $50 though I was able to buy after rebate for $10. Haven't done that much with it though I'll use it for some fun animations to send friends. Back in the early 1990's Microsoft came out with a program called 3D Movie Maker (actually they bought it from a small company). That program got it right as far as making little 3D animations easily. Unfortunately it came out at a time where making video files and distributing them online was yet possible since most people did not have that bandwidth and computers could only display postage stamp size videos. Instead the program generate an .exe which would play the animation and could be put on floppy. Programs like Poser, iClone and MovieStorm do character animation. Poser has become a means for people making 3D porn because they've gone for realism and anatomically correct models. I talked once with the program's producer who knew damn well they were selling lots of copies just for that. Poser has a frustrating interface by Kai (don't remember his last name) and it is easy to mess up a model animation. iClone is easier to use but also going for more realism but their product has always been unbalanced and they provide a well balanced set of props, etc. Fine if you want to do rap videos or dragon fantasies. MovieStorm is free and somewhat easy to use. I can be easier to set up shots and create sets. While Poser and iClone can import 3D models from other sources and MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that. Also Poser and iClone allow for models with custom faces. IOW, you can put a friend's face on a model and have them do ridiculous things. MovieStorm last I used it didn't have that ability. As a programmer I've been tempted to build my own. Movie directors hire 3D animation house to do pre-viz animations of their movie. Most of these house use 3D Studio, an expensive program originally created by AutoDesk. But the pre-vis often to save time and expense use very basic un-realistic models. What I wanted to do was build a program that could do the un-realistic modeling. Artists want the realism but people who want to create a small video to put on YouTube don't need it. This also seems what the Xtranormal people discovered. How hard is it to build your own? I mean for YOU to build your own, I can't even keep my buttons in my blackberry. But personally, I would be fascinated to see what you could do with it. It would not be easy but 26 years of programming experience helps. One doesn't need to create the 3D engine just use OpenGL. K. Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? ** I just finished a 985 pg book, The Kindly Ones, the fictional memoirs of a switchhitting SS officer tasked with various jobs mostly involved with ethnic cleansing of the other in the East. Does a good job of showing how educated people (the fictional author, although he is a psychopath, has a doctorate) managed to resolve their feelings about killing with the goals of the Nazi party (I am not implying that your family was somehow involved in the killings). I didn't write the piece, Bob. It has nothing to do with my family. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Partial transcript: As we draw close to finalizing and passing real health insurance reform, the defenders of the Notice how Obama has shifted the discussion from health care reform to health INSURANCE reform. IMO the distinction is simply a weasel out of emphasizing health care. Oh, WAIT a minnit! That shift was deliberately designed to appeal to the public, for whom health *insurance* is the big bugaboo. The best health care in the world doesn't do you any good if you can't afford insurance or your insurance won't pay for it because you had a preexisting condition or once had a hangnail you didn't report on your application. We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip My argument with reframing is that it waters down the issue when Obama doesn't have to. He doesn't need to pretty the pig to please folks who are misinformed He needs to educate them. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. It doesn't water down the issue, it frames it more accurately and effectively. It puts the bull's eye on the insurance companies where it belongs. That's what people are complaining about; that's why reform is necessary. Health *care* doesn't need to be reformed, or at least not anywhere near so much as health *insurance* does. To me, that *is* educating the public, the first step, anyway. And for god's sake, call off the leftwing attack dogs saying people who question health care stupid, Nazi, racists. Of course there are loudmouths at town halls but it shuts down dialogue when you paint everyone with the same brush. The rhetoric on both sides is so inflamed it's impossible to have a sane conversation. It plays right into the hands of the people who don't want a public option, the insurance companies. I agree that demonizing the popular opposition doesn't help. Obama needs to get in everyone's face about the fact that healthcare with a public option is less expensive. Not a word. He needs to tell people the majority of people want a public option. Not a word. He needs to come up with a plan of his own, something simple and understandable, like reducing the eligibility age for medicare. Not a word. If he were honest he would say, Kiss your public option and cheaper healthcare goodbye. I'm in the pocket of the insurance folks, roll over so they can screw you. I agree with just about everything you say *except* the notion that he's in the pocket of the insurance folks and is trying to craft reform for their benefit. I think he'd love to see not just a public option but single- payer and just eliminate private insurance altogether. He thought this was all going to be much easier than it has been. He thought he'd be the irresistible force, and instead he's come up against the immoveable object. And now he's having to punt, to make concessions to the insurance companies to keep them from killing reform altogether. It isn't that he's trying to keep the money spout open for his reelection; it's that he doesn't have a choice about catering to the companies if he wants to get *anything* passed. If he fails on reform, he's going to have a very hard time getting reelected no matter how much the insurance companies bless him financially. snip A word about co-ops: They suck. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/31/103439/462 Going to keep my eyes open for a defense of co-ops. I've read several by folks I respect, but I didn't note the links at the time. I'm not convinced co-ops are hopeless. A word about telling the left to back off: Judy wrote: But there have been no reports from activist organizations that they've been told to back off. Violet puts that illusion to rest, quoting Jane Hamsher quoting potty mouth Rahm Emanuel: Yeah, I'll take that back. I was going by earlier reports. I hadn't heard about the Emanuel tirade. snip In all this I keep thinking, if Hillary were still in the Senate, she would probably have given Max Baucus holy hell for taking the public option off the table right from the git go. She'd have fought a lot harder, there's no question in my mind. But it's my understanding she's been supported financially by the insurance companies and Big Pharma just as Obama and the Dems have. It's makes me wonder if appointing her to SOS was a way to shut her up. She is passionate about healhcare reform. Could well be. After the debacle during Bill's first term, Obama probably didn't want her associated with reform. I don't think she ever referred to it as insurance reform. Good for her. I'd be curious to know if she'd approve of that
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamayl...@... wrote: snip I tell ya, its all sick. WE are SICK. ME and YOU, and we gotta know it to stop it and do something better. clapclapclapclapclap Brava, mirza, great rant.
[FairfieldLife] Re: anyone interested in throwing rocks in the lake and talking spiritual esoteric
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamaylord@ wrote: And as long as someone isn't going to 'unsubscribe' me without my consent, I'll probably be fine. And if they do unsubscribe me without my consent, well, I think I'll be fine then too. As one of the moderators, the only folks who I unsubscribe are spammers. Moderators receive an email notification whenever someone unsubscribes from FFL, and what Bhairitu was referring to is me relaying that info to FFL as a courtesy when someone makes a stink about FFL not meeting their expectations and then unsubscribes. Why should people waste their time trying to engage someone who has unsubscribed from the group? Ahh,I can see what you mean.Someone might think it should be a friendly spiritual site but it is an everything site from what I can tell, some info, some news, some invites and scheduling, some spiritual topics, and WHOLE lot of opinion. And other things. It's a cornucopia of a wild everything it appears to me. I kinda like the way u said it though alexander, it didn't make me want to flair up and bite someone's eyes out. And I HAVE been unsubscribed from a whole lot of places (symbolicly, I was unsubscribed from a number of churches and a few family members. couple husbands, the usual) because I wasn't the timid little woman I was supposed to be. So I have learned to accept it, it's actually good for me, it lets me move on to define who I am outside someone's less then ideal concept of what they think I should be. At the same time,I feel hugely grateful and relieved when I don't have to be unsubscribed from somewhere I'd like to be against my will. Come to think of it, it usually is me, doing the unsubscribing. And personally I think some of these guys wasting their time trying to get someone to respond whom they drove off with a stick is probably the least of all things I would feel sorry for them over.LOL, that seems equivilant to someone killing their dog and then trying to get it to get up and play with them. and then realizing, oh no, they wasted the last five minutes of their life trying to get the dog to respond. I think they waste a lot more time in killing the dog then in trying to get it to respond. And they should try, in my opinion, killing people off less and then they don't need to worry as much about being sad over wasting time getting them to respond. If they drive me off, I hope they spend a whole fawking year trying to get me to respond. And I don't waste a freakin nano tear over that, not even a pretend nano tear. I'd laugh my ass off. by the way, where is that porn at?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamaylord@ wrote: snip I tell ya, its all sick. WE are SICK. ME and YOU, and we gotta know it to stop it and do something better. clapclapclapclapclap Brava, mirza, great rant. Big smile. Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? ** I just finished a 985 pg book, The Kindly Ones, the fictional memoirs of a switchhitting SS officer tasked with various jobs mostly involved with ethnic cleansing of the other in the East. Does a good job of showing how educated people (the fictional author, although he is a psychopath, has a doctorate) managed to resolve their feelings about killing with the goals of the Nazi party (I am not implying that your family was somehow involved in the killings). http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/books/review/Gates-t.html I didn't write the piece, Bob. It has nothing to do with my family. *** That Evelyn Woods speedreading course I took back in the 60s usually pays off, but obviously not in this case...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama-a litle punk Kid with Wild ideas!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: ..that have never worked, call it Obama Marxism. Barack Obama is one of the biggest con-artists America has ever known, and his ideas for America are becoming clearer and clearer, (in spite of his sugar coated rhetoric), and the American public doesn't like 'em. Liberal democrats like Obama believe the ends justify the means because they are so convinced their misguided compassion trumps all, (as if the democrats have a corner on compassion), as a result democrats lie with alacrity on a daily basis to push their phony trial attorney, Union boss agendas, the antitheis of American entrepreneurship and merit based exceptionalism. I think Obama is the case of someone who is on the road to hell with good intentions. I truly believe Obama wants to be a Reagan-like president or -- even more acurately -- Clintonesquely president. He made all sorts of promises during the election and now he's finding out he can't deliver AND that the presidency isn't as strong as he thought it was. He's like a deer caught in the headlights. For example, his deficit of about $1.8 trillion or whatever it is: I think he had no idea how budgets worked from both a revenue and expenditure standpoint. Now that he's the CEO of the whole thing he is truly freaked out. He's like the high schooler who makes all sorts of promises to get elected as student council president but now that he IS president he sees that it is a lot harder than he thought, and that's even having a majority congress and senate on his side. For example, he desperately needs to increase income tax revenue and wants to increase the marginal taxes for those with income over $250,000. But he now knows -- because since he is president I'm sure the people at Treasury have told him so -- that the lower the tax rate is for the rich, the MORE tax revenue you actually get...and if he puts up the marginal rate for the rich, he's going to lower revenues! The guy's an amateur who would quickly abandon the Marxism and Leftism he thinks he's so cool if he could get away with it. But he can't. Of course, 90% of the Bush policies that he was opposed to prior to the election he has now continued with... Really? Cuzz he seems more like my granpa who came into the room and broke up a destruction fest then started trying to put the pieces back together.poor sonofabitch, there aint even shelves left to put stuff back on. Your blaming him for not having the right stuff right off the bat to put it back together? Well,Maybe he never will. But WTF? why don't we just give it back then, to those who destroyed it? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I've heard this said. But no one who ever said that REALLY thought about what they were saying in depth, in my opinion. Is it REALLY good intentions that lead us to hell? Was the guillotine REALLY a good intention? They still wanted to cut someone's head off, they just wanted to do it faster and less painfully. Either his whole premise was off OR he WAS trying to do good to those people whose head's were whacked at a couple dozen times in which case Dr. guillotine isn't going to hell. I think his premise was off a little, personally. But who is to say for sure? I would submit to you that the road to hell is paved with good intentions is a statement not supported in its true meaning by any religion or peaceful spiritual path. I would submit that good intentions are the precursor of eventual solutions, and that by damning them, you run a far greater risk of staying where you are and becoming stagnant.If you make a mistake, shit happens, but you didn't do it on PURPOSE!! If someone is going to hurt me, I FAR prefer that it happens ON ACCIDENT!! I'm praying for Obama, I hope he succeeds, if he can't, I hope he tries like hell, And I will still feel dignified in standing by him, as long as he MEANS it. As long as his intentions are good. Don't you see, if our intentions are good, that is what we will bring to us! Maybe not today or tomorrow, but SOME TOMORROW DAMMIT!!!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency
Shemp, I have to disagree with you on this one. First of all dog fighting is highly illegal. Nobody makes cattle,.sheep, swine. or chickens fight for their lives before they are slaughtered for food. --- On Sun, 8/9/09, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net wrote: From: shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net Subject: [FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 8:15 PM I don't think Michael Vick should have spent a day in prison. Needless to say, I think what he did to those dogs was horrific and he should have paid some penalty for it. But I'll tell you why I don't think he should have spent a minute in prison. We are a society that eats animals. Not by the thousands. Not by the millions. Not by the tens of millions. BUT BY THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS EACH YEAR! We use cows, for example, to give us what is arguably the most complete, perfect food -- milk, just like from our own mothers -- and then as a reward for nourishing us, we bring her to a slaughterhouse, at the end of her usefulness as a reservoir of milk, where we first subject her cerebral cortex to a jolt of electricity from a prod in order to brain-kill her and then proceed to cut off her head, chop her up into little pieces, mince her, and then proceed to eat her in the next day's Big Mac. HOW IS THAT ANY LESS BARBARIC THAN WHAT MICHAEL VICK DID TO THOSE DOGS? At least he wasn't a hypocrite about it and butchered the poor animals with by his own hand. We, on the other hand, consume our meats neatly laid out before us without any clue as to the torture and vileness that we had subjected the animal to both during and at the end of its life. I actually have more respect for hunters who hunt and kill deer or whatever because at least those animals had a life in the wild before they were killed. And the hunter actually gets down and does the dirty work of both killing and, often, cutting the animal up (although the butchering is usually left to a professional) . But in over 98% of the cases, the hunter and his family eat the animal they have killed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What he's up against . . .
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: [500] - - And before I go about demonstrating how, sadly, easy it is to prove the dumbness dragging down our country, let me just say that ignorance has life and death consequences. On the eve of the Iraq War, 69% of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9/11. Four years later, 34% still did. Or take the health care debate we're presently having: members of Congress have recessed now so they can go home and listen to their constituents. An urge they should resist because their constituents don't know anything. At a recent town-hall meeting in South Carolina, a man stood up and told his Congressman to keep your government hands off my Medicare, which is kind of like driving cross country to protest highways. I'm the bad guy for saying it's a stupid country, yet polls show that a majority of Americans cannot name a single branch of government, or explain what the Bill of Rights is. 24% could not name the country America fought in the Revolutionary War. More than two-thirds of Americans don't know what's in Roe v. Wade. Two-thirds don't know what the Food and Drug Administration does. Some of this stuff you should be able to pick up simply by being alive. You know, like the way the Slumdog kid knew about cricket. Not here. Nearly half of Americans don't know that states have two senators and more than half can't name their congressman. And among Republican governors, only 30% got their wife's name right on the first try. Sarah Palin says she would never apologize for America. Even though a Gallup poll says 18% of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth. No, they're not stupid. They're interplanetary mavericks. A third of Republicans believe Obama is not a citizen, and a third of Democrats believe that George Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which is an absurd sentence because it contains the words Bush and knowledge. People bitch and moan about taxes and spending, but they have no idea what their government spends money on. The average voter thinks foreign aid consumes 24% of our federal budget. It's actually less than 1%. . . ...And these are the idiots we want to weigh in on the minutia of health care policy? Please, this country is like a college chick after two Long Island Iced Teas: we can be talked into anything, like wars, and we can be talked out of anything, like health care. We should forget town halls, and replace them with study halls... ... And if you want to call me an elitist for this, I say thank you. Yes, I want decisions made by an elite group of people who know what they're talking about. That means Obama budget director Peter Orszag, not Sarah Palin. Which is the way our founding fathers wanted it. James Madison wrote that pure democracy doesn't work because there is nothing to check... an obnoxious individual. Then, in the margins, he doodled a picture of Joe the Plumber. Until we admit there are things we don't know, we can't even start asking the questions to find out. Until we admit that America can make a mistake, we can't stop the next one. A smart guy named Chesterton once said: My country, right or wrong is a thing no patriot would ever think of saying... It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.' To which most Americans would respond: Are you calling my mother a drunk? ~~ Bill Maher http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-smart-president_b_2539\ 96.html Maybe the conspiracy nuts saying there is a conspiracy to make the population dumber had some basis? (chemtrails-fluoride etc).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Michael Vick and moral equivalency
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Shemp, I have to disagree with you on this one. First of all dog fighting is highly illegal. Nobody makes cattle,.sheep, swine. or chickens fight for their lives before they are slaughtered for food. Maybe they should. --- On Sun, 8/9/09, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: From: shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... Subject: [FairfieldLife] Michael Vick and moral equivalency To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 8:15 PM I don't think Michael Vick should have spent a day in prison. Needless to say, I think what he did to those dogs was horrific and he should have paid some penalty for it. But I'll tell you why I don't think he should have spent a minute in prison. We are a society that eats animals. Not by the thousands. Not by the millions. Not by the tens of millions. BUT BY THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS EACH YEAR! We use cows, for example, to give us what is arguably the most complete, perfect food -- milk, just like from our own mothers -- and then as a reward for nourishing us, we bring her to a slaughterhouse, at the end of her usefulness as a reservoir of milk, where we first subject her cerebral cortex to a jolt of electricity from a prod in order to brain-kill her and then proceed to cut off her head, chop her up into little pieces, mince her, and then proceed to eat her in the next day's Big Mac. HOW IS THAT ANY LESS BARBARIC THAN WHAT MICHAEL VICK DID TO THOSE DOGS? At least he wasn't a hypocrite about it and butchered the poor animals with by his own hand. We, on the other hand, consume our meats neatly laid out before us without any clue as to the torture and vileness that we had subjected the animal to both during and at the end of its life. I actually have more respect for hunters who hunt and kill deer or whatever because at least those animals had a life in the wild before they were killed. And the hunter actually gets down and does the dirty work of both killing and, often, cutting the animal up (although the butchering is usually left to a professional) . But in over 98% of the cases, the hunter and his family eat the animal they have killed.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
Shemp is absolutely right on this. --- On Sun, 8/9/09, do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com wrote: From: do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 3:10 PM --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ ... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? [snip] What's he talking about; the Nazis WERE socialists. Na and Zi are the two letters that stand for the German spelling of National Socialists. Sure, they fought and opposed the Bolsheviks.. .but this was pretty much a fight within the family, much the same way that the Stalinists fought the Trotskyites. Nazis were for the workers, social programs, and central control of the economy. So were the socialists and communists. They are all on the same spectrum; they only vary in the degrees and ways they all suppress people. It has been a myth and a creation of the Left since WWII to make the Nazis into some sort of right-wing opposite-of- socialism type of thing. They did that to distance themselves from the incredible similarities Nazism has to socialism (peas in a pod). Only in the twisted little world of your mind, Shremp. Kinda like what the Democrats do today with their own history with the DixieCrats where they have successfully convinced the masses that it was the Republicans that supported segregation and Jim Crow when, of course, it was the Democrats who did...for over 100 years from the end of the Civil War to about 30 years ago. Bananas.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamayl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: From the New York Times: August 8, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Women at Risk By BOB HERBERT I actually look good. I dress good, am clean- shaven, bathe, touch of cologne yet 30 million women rejected me, wrote George Sodini in a blog that he kept while preparing for this week's shooting in a Pennsylvania gym in which he killed three women, wounded nine others and then killed himself. We've seen this tragic ritual so often that it has the feel of a formula. A guy is filled with a seething rage toward women and has easy access to guns. The result: mass slaughter We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment. The mainstream culture is filled with the most gruesome forms of misogyny, and pornography is now a multibillion-dollar industry much of it controlled by mainstream U.S. corporations. One of the striking things about mass killings in the U.S. is how consistently we find that the killers were riddled with shame and sexual humiliation, which they inevitably blamed on women and girls. The answer to their feelings of inadequacy was to get their hands on a gun (or guns) and begin blowing people away Life in the United States is mind-bogglingly violent. But we should take particular notice of the staggering amounts of violence brought down on the nation's women and girls each and every day for no other reason than who they are. They are attacked because they are female We would become much more sane, much healthier, as a society if we could bring ourselves to acknowledge that misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem, and that the twisted way so many men feel about women, combined with the absurdly easy availability of guns, is a toxic mix of the most tragic proportions. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/opinion/08herbert.html?_r=1 http://tinyurl.com/nazqyf Well, seems in all fairness I should mention that the the rape, murder and humiliation of EVERYONE is just great entertainment in the media. We kill millions of more men in movies then women, not only that, but we kill them en mass in the movies, and war? DAYAM, we have to FIGHT for the RIGHT to go be killed in war, as a woman,LOL. When we do kill a woman in the movies it's all special and slow like it is a grand event. Just like this poor mentally Ill guy, made a HUGE deal out of it, poor bastard, killed himself too, he didn't die without the female sex however, men, its no big deal to kill in the movies we apparently feel, or anywhere else. Women and children, thats who we shouldn't kill. C'mon, talk about sexism, we can just pop men off like scattering seeds in a field. No wonder poor guys feel a little pissed off. Having said that, What about the true humiliation we do to women? I am a woman.Have you driven by the square? I just feel like running something over every time I see those stupid dolls. Not that I dislike dolls, not that they aren't pretty, but has any one THOUGHT about what they represent? And in a nice way on top of it all? Let's examine this, it is a symbol of a woman, boobs, fashion clothes, and any old dayam thing you can find to stick out of its head, a shoe, a stick, it doesn't matter. Cuz the important parts are there, she is skewered on a stick so she can't leave, she has no power (legs) and she is dressed to be pretty for us,nice boobs very visible, with a hat with no head for it, do we REALLY REALLY REALLY get what is humiliating about what society tells us we are as women? Fawk, its a miracle we aren't mowing MEN down in the gyms. But I'll bet 3 ass hairs it's a woman who created those 'pwetty wittle dolls' up there. It's the woman who says who REALLY lives and dies. Untill maybe 150 yrs ago if a mother of an infant died,that baby died too, unless ANOTHER nursing mother could be found or by a small chance some goat or cow milk would help that baby. The ONLY way a man CAN dominate us is by making us think GOD made it that way, cuz the truth is, we can go amazon anytime. You take control and tell your baby boys how to treat you as a mother and viola, problem solved for all society. It is the hurt from the IMBALANCE of this unnatural skewering of both men AND women. It doesn't matter who is off in the ying and yang,they will both be out of their true inner power if the whole gets imbalanced. I don't want my baby boy to die any more then I want my baby girl to die, call it his honor or his
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Aug 08 00:00:00 2009 End Date (UTC): Sat Aug 15 00:00:00 2009 162 messages as of (UTC) Mon Aug 10 00:13:20 2009 24 shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net 19 authfriend jst...@panix.com 17 mirza mirzamayl...@yahoo.com 17 Robert babajii...@yahoo.com 14 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 9 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 7 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 7 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 6 WillyTex no_re...@yahoogroups.com 6 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 4 Nelson nelsonriddle2...@yahoo.com 3 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 3 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 3 bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com 3 Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com 2 ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@yahoo.com 2 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 Paul Mason premanandp...@yahoo.co.uk 2 Marek Reavis reavisma...@sbcglobal.net 1 seekliberation seekliberat...@yahoo.com 1 rudyxrudy no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 michael vedamer...@yahoo.de 1 emptybill emptyb...@yahoo.com 1 Patrick Gillam jpgil...@yahoo.com 1 Mike Doughney m...@doughney.com 1 John jr_...@yahoo.com 1 Dick Mays dickm...@lisco.com 1 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 1 BillyG. wg...@yahoo.com Posters: 30 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Limbaugh's use of *Nazi* was in response to Pelosi's insinuation that the protesters at town hall meetings were Nazis. ie they were carrying swastikas,which the media payed little attention to. Bullcrap. She was pointing out how disgusting it was that the protesters were making Obama co. out to be Nazis. And the right-wingers accused her of *lying* about the swastikas. Unfortunately, there are plenty of photographs showing the signs with swastikas. Here's just one example: So now the right-wingers are pretending she was saying the *protesters* are Nazis. The right wing really has no shame.
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? [snip] You couldn't be a Nazi without killing anyone... The main ingredient of Nazism, was murder, and the accompanying fear, which cause people to do all kinds of gruesome stuff... Hitler devoted himself to being an agent of evil, and to that end, he drove the world where he lived, into the dust... He is so regarded in Germany as such a mockery of everything human, that the very mention of him or anything he stood for, is expressly against German Law... My father joined up to fight these bastards, when he was seventeen years old...like many Americans did, during that era... If your Grandfather had been in his way, he would have had a shorter stay here... They were called to defend the world against this vile expression of the lowest form of life... Hitler was a drug addict, a sexual pervert, a sadist/machocist, and every other vile thing, which is possible to think of... He and his coherts were heartless and soul-less by the time they were finished with their evil deeds...
[FairfieldLife] American Stormtroopers Body Slam Grandmother
This is how sad things are getting in this country. Too many older cops with better sense are asked to retire and being replaced by cheaper young thugs probably just back from Iraq who don't know any better. This 87 year old grandmother walking with a cane was obviously no threat to anybody even if she did have a knife. My bet that woman police officer will be soon looking for another job though she may deserve to be body slammed herself in prison. http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/08/video-ohio-cop-bodyslams-knife-wielding-grandma/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Limbaugh's use of *Nazi* was in response to Pelosi's insinuation that the protesters at town hall meetings were Nazis. ie they were carrying swastikas,which the media payed little attention to. The *Barrack the Magic Negro* song was a parody of an article in the L.A. Times and concerns of self appointed African/American leaders who questioned whether Obama was *black* enough to represent African/Americans. Limbaugh is a master of turning the words of liberals back on themselves. (snip) Like Hitler, he is a master at causing confusion, fear and chaos... He is tapped into the same force of lies, distortions, prejudice, fear, lust, greed and is a megalomaniac like the evil doers of the past... If we don't learn from the past, we will be doomed to repeat it... Rush and his friends are mirroring the last throes of Nazism in complete retreat...bankrupted and exposed for the dead -end it is... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama-a litle punk Kid with Wild ideas!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamayl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: ..that have never worked, call it Obama Marxism. Barack Obama is one of the biggest con-artists America has ever known, and his ideas for America are becoming clearer and clearer, (in spite of his sugar coated rhetoric), and the American public doesn't like 'em. Liberal democrats like Obama believe the ends justify the means because they are so convinced their misguided compassion trumps all, (as if the democrats have a corner on compassion), as a result democrats lie with alacrity on a daily basis to push their phony trial attorney, Union boss agendas, the antitheis of American entrepreneurship and merit based exceptionalism. I think Obama is the case of someone who is on the road to hell with good intentions. I truly believe Obama wants to be a Reagan-like president or -- even more acurately -- Clintonesquely president. He made all sorts of promises during the election and now he's finding out he can't deliver AND that the presidency isn't as strong as he thought it was. He's like a deer caught in the headlights. For example, his deficit of about $1.8 trillion or whatever it is: I think he had no idea how budgets worked from both a revenue and expenditure standpoint. Now that he's the CEO of the whole thing he is truly freaked out. He's like the high schooler who makes all sorts of promises to get elected as student council president but now that he IS president he sees that it is a lot harder than he thought, and that's even having a majority congress and senate on his side. For example, he desperately needs to increase income tax revenue and wants to increase the marginal taxes for those with income over $250,000. But he now knows -- because since he is president I'm sure the people at Treasury have told him so -- that the lower the tax rate is for the rich, the MORE tax revenue you actually get...and if he puts up the marginal rate for the rich, he's going to lower revenues! The guy's an amateur who would quickly abandon the Marxism and Leftism he thinks he's so cool if he could get away with it. But he can't. Of course, 90% of the Bush policies that he was opposed to prior to the election he has now continued with... Really? Cuzz he seems more like my granpa who came into the room and broke up a destruction fest then started trying to put the pieces back together.poor sonofabitch, there aint even shelves left to put stuff back on. Your blaming him for not having the right stuff right off the bat to put it back together? Well,Maybe he never will. But WTF? why don't we just give it back then, to those who destroyed it? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I've heard this said. But no one who ever said that REALLY thought about what they were saying in depth, in my opinion. Is it REALLY good intentions that lead us to hell? Was the guillotine REALLY a good intention? They still wanted to cut someone's head off, they just wanted to do it faster and less painfully. Either his whole premise was off OR he WAS trying to do good to those people whose head's were whacked at a couple dozen times in which case Dr. guillotine isn't going to hell. I think his premise was off a little, personally. But who is to say for sure? I would submit to you that the road to hell is paved with good intentions is a statement not supported in its true meaning by any religion or peaceful spiritual path. I would submit that good intentions are the precursor of eventual solutions, and that by damning them, you run a far greater risk of staying where you are and becoming stagnant.If you make a mistake, shit happens, but you didn't do it on PURPOSE!! If someone is going to hurt me, I FAR prefer that it happens ON ACCIDENT!! I'm praying for Obama, I hope he succeeds, if he can't, I hope he tries like hell, And I will still feel dignified in standing by him, as long as he MEANS it. As long as his intentions are good. Don't you see, if our intentions are good, that is what we will bring to us! Maybe not today or tomorrow, but SOME TOMORROW DAMMIT!!! Sigh...another cloudy headed liberal.
[FairfieldLife] 'Lucifer and Nazism'
The first step, on Hitler's path to create his infamous Nazi Movement, Started in Austria... There he held the sword that pierced Jesus, in order to attune himself to the force that murdered Jesus Christ. Jesus called Lucifer, 'A Murderer Since the Beginning of Time'... So, this is the story of Lucifer and the Story of Nazism... It is based on murder... It is based on rebellion against God the Creator... It is playing God, the ultimate arrogant megalomania that is available for the taking... All you need to do, is freeze your heart and sell your soul... There are all kinds of voices which will prod you to do this, while here at this time, on earth... This one called Hitler basically bowed down to this cold-hearted and soul-less force and became an agent of it... He shot drugs, cocaine, methadrine, morphine and testosterone...the war was driven by a drug addicted mad-man...silly as that sounds. God gave us free will...and does not interfere with it. God does not beg you to return...he waits... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
Mirza, I feel you. Thank you for such a fabulous rant. I have to fess up. I consider myself a feminist but just to show you how much I've been conditioned to accepting the portrayal of women as objects, it never occurred to me just how offensive the mannequins on the square really can be to an open and aware woman like yourself. I just thought of it as art. They are decorated beautifully, but looking at the deeper significance of what they represent as you have so eloquently written, all I can say is, I would love to throw rocks with you. Write to me privately on yahoo email. I have some real trust issues with the some of the dudes on this forum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mirza mirzamayl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: From the New York Times: August 8, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Women at Risk By BOB HERBERT I actually look good. I dress good, am clean- shaven, bathe, touch of cologne yet 30 million women rejected me, wrote George Sodini in a blog that he kept while preparing for this week's shooting in a Pennsylvania gym in which he killed three women, wounded nine others and then killed himself. We've seen this tragic ritual so often that it has the feel of a formula. A guy is filled with a seething rage toward women and has easy access to guns. The result: mass slaughter We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment. The mainstream culture is filled with the most gruesome forms of misogyny, and pornography is now a multibillion-dollar industry much of it controlled by mainstream U.S. corporations. One of the striking things about mass killings in the U.S. is how consistently we find that the killers were riddled with shame and sexual humiliation, which they inevitably blamed on women and girls. The answer to their feelings of inadequacy was to get their hands on a gun (or guns) and begin blowing people away Life in the United States is mind-bogglingly violent. But we should take particular notice of the staggering amounts of violence brought down on the nation's women and girls each and every day for no other reason than who they are. They are attacked because they are female We would become much more sane, much healthier, as a society if we could bring ourselves to acknowledge that misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem, and that the twisted way so many men feel about women, combined with the absurdly easy availability of guns, is a toxic mix of the most tragic proportions. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/opinion/08herbert.html?_r=1 http://tinyurl.com/nazqyf Well, seems in all fairness I should mention that the the rape, murder and humiliation of EVERYONE is just great entertainment in the media. We kill millions of more men in movies then women, not only that, but we kill them en mass in the movies, and war? DAYAM, we have to FIGHT for the RIGHT to go be killed in war, as a woman,LOL. When we do kill a woman in the movies it's all special and slow like it is a grand event. Just like this poor mentally Ill guy, made a HUGE deal out of it, poor bastard, killed himself too, he didn't die without the female sex however, men, its no big deal to kill in the movies we apparently feel, or anywhere else. Women and children, thats who we shouldn't kill. C'mon, talk about sexism, we can just pop men off like scattering seeds in a field. No wonder poor guys feel a little pissed off. Having said that, What about the true humiliation we do to women? I am a woman.Have you driven by the square? I just feel like running something over every time I see those stupid dolls. Not that I dislike dolls, not that they aren't pretty, but has any one THOUGHT about what they represent? And in a nice way on top of it all? Let's examine this, it is a symbol of a woman, boobs, fashion clothes, and any old dayam thing you can find to stick out of its head, a shoe, a stick, it doesn't matter. Cuz the important parts are there, she is skewered on a stick so she can't leave, she has no power (legs) and she is dressed to be pretty for us,nice boobs very visible, with a hat with no head for it, do we REALLY REALLY REALLY get what is humiliating about what society tells us we are as women? Fawk, its a miracle we aren't mowing MEN down in the gyms. But I'll bet 3 ass hairs it's a woman who created those 'pwetty wittle dolls' up there. It's the woman who says who REALLY lives and dies. Untill maybe 150 yrs ago if a mother of an infant died,that baby died too, unless ANOTHER
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
Judy , I rest my case. --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Robert babajii...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Robert babajii...@yahoo.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:38 AM --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: Limbaugh's use of *Nazi* was in response to Pelosi's insinuation that the protesters at town hall meetings were Nazis. ie they were carrying swastikas,which the media payed little attention to. The *Barrack the Magic Negro* song was a parody of an article in the L.A. Times and concerns of self appointed African/American leaders who questioned whether Obama was *black* enough to represent African/Americans. Limbaugh is a master of turning the words of liberals back on themselves. (snip) Like Hitler, he is a master at causing confusion, fear and chaos... He is tapped into the same force of lies, distortions, prejudice, fear, lust, greed and is a megalomaniac like the evil doers of the past... If we don't learn from the past, we will be doomed to repeat it... Rush and his friends are mirroring the last throes of Nazism in complete retreat...bankrupte d and exposed for the dead -end it is... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Hey Robert, It's August 9th
And I'm not under water. Guess the California earthquake you predicted didn't happen unless you want to count those little jolts (1-2 on the scale). Sometimes I can't tell those from my subwoofer shakes. FYI, if California is on a shelf and breaks off the resultant ecological disruption might wipe out most of mankind and make the planet unlivable for quite some time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: The You Tubes I've seen show Pelosi saying they were carrying swastikas and other symbols in a town hall meeting Nothing about protesters calling Obama and company Nazis. Perhaps that is what she meant, but it is not what she said. Of course that's what she meant. It wouldn't have occurred to her that she *needed* to say they were equating Obama with Nazism, because the alternative is so ludicrously unlikely. Combine that with other comments from other democrat congressmen referring to protesters as brown shirts, what else is one to think? One should use a little common sense. The people who come to these town halls aren't going to *ally themselves* with Nazism, for goodness' sake. To call someone a Nazi is an *insult*, no matter whether it's a right-winger or a Democrat who does it. That You Tube was the basis of Limbaugh's comment. Limbaugh knew perfectly what Pelosi meant. He just saw a way to stir up his dittoheads against Pelosi by lying about it. Right wingers have no shame? Calling Republicans *Nazis* is standard rhetoric from the left and has been as long as I can remember. Well, it isn't standard; it's as unacceptable from Democrats as it is from Republicans. But again, it's an *insult*, not anything intended to be taken literally. Not even the right-wingers with the swastika signs are saying they think Obama Co. have *allied* themselves with Nazism. It's a metaphor: you're *behaving like* Nazis. But by no shame, I'm not even referring to the insult. I'm talking about (a) the initial accusation that Pelosi was lying about there being swastika signs; and (b) the backpedal lie, once the photos came out, that Pelosi was accusing the protesters of carrying swastikas to declare their sympathy with Nazism. It really doesn't get much filthier than that. Here's more of the signs that Pelosi was talking about: [Swastikas] http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e20120a4d27a86\ 970b-popup Obama with a Hitler moustache. If the Pelosi was saying the protesters were Nazis, she must think they venerate Obama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Judy , I rest my case. On the basis of what *Robert* says?? guffaw --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Robert babajii...@... wrote: From: Robert babajii...@... Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:38 AM --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: Limbaugh's use of *Nazi* was in response to Pelosi's insinuation that the protesters at town hall meetings were Nazis. ie they were carrying swastikas,which the media payed little attention to. The *Barrack the Magic Negro* song was a parody of an article in the L.A. Times and concerns of self appointed African/American leaders who questioned whether Obama was *black* enough to represent African/Americans. Limbaugh is a master of turning the words of liberals back on themselves. (snip) Like Hitler, he is a master at causing confusion, fear and chaos... He is tapped into the same force of lies, distortions, prejudice, fear, lust, greed and is a megalomaniac like the evil doers of the past... If we don't learn from the past, we will be doomed to repeat it... Rush and his friends are mirroring the last throes of Nazism in complete retreat...bankrupte d and exposed for the dead -end it is... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Partial transcript: As we draw close to finalizing and passing real health insurance reform, the defenders of the Notice how Obama has shifted the discussion from health care reform to health INSURANCE reform. IMO the distinction is simply a weasel out of emphasizing health care. Oh, WAIT a minnit! That shift was deliberately designed to appeal to the public, for whom health *insurance* is the big bugaboo. The best health care in the world doesn't do you any good if you can't afford insurance or your insurance won't pay for it because you had a preexisting condition or once had a hangnail you didn't report on your application. We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip My argument with reframing is that it waters down the issue when Obama doesn't have to. He doesn't need to pretty the pig to please folks who are misinformed He needs to educate them. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. It doesn't water down the issue, it frames it more accurately and effectively. It puts the bull's eye on the insurance companies where it belongs. That's what people are complaining about; that's why reform is necessary. Health *care* doesn't need to be reformed, or at least not anywhere near so much as health *insurance* does. To me, that *is* educating the public, the first step, anyway. We'll have to disagree on this point. IMO Obama needs to educate the public about the lack of health care because of greedy insurance companies. They are the reason we have lousy health care. We don't have a lousy of insurance companies because of sick people. O.K. maybe this fails logical scrutiny. The bottom line is, it just doesn't feel right. It feels like a subtle double cross or that he cares more about placating insurance companies than he does about delivering health care. Changing the frame in the middle of the game feels like fudging the facts. My stubbornness on this point is just a reflection of my lack of trust all along that we could get a decent health care bill. At this point it looks like we're getting co-ops instead of a public option and I'm not too hopeful about it. I still think this is a set up for something worse than what we have. Great link Judy, thanks. Here's the kicker: 10) Don't negotiate from the middle, damn it. Ask for the moon and stars, and work your way toward the middle, or risk people thinking you're a corporatist tool. (Ahem.) That sums it up for me. And for god's sake, call off the leftwing attack dogs saying people who question health care stupid, Nazi, racists. Of course there are loudmouths at town halls but it shuts down dialogue when you paint everyone with the same brush. The rhetoric on both sides is so inflamed it's impossible to have a sane conversation. It plays right into the hands of the people who don't want a public option, the insurance companies. I agree that demonizing the popular opposition doesn't help. Obama needs to get in everyone's face about the fact that healthcare with a public option is less expensive. Not a word. He needs to tell people the majority of people want a public option. Not a word. He needs to come up with a plan of his own, something simple and understandable, like reducing the eligibility age for medicare. Not a word. If he were honest he would say, Kiss your public option and cheaper healthcare goodbye. I'm in the pocket of the insurance folks, roll over so they can screw you. I agree with just about everything you say *except* the notion that he's in the pocket of the insurance folks and is trying to craft reform for their benefit. I think he'd love to see not just a public option but single- payer and just eliminate private insurance altogether. Perhaps Obama did want single payer in his more idealistic moments before he got elected, but elections come with a price tag and a due bill. He thought this was all going to be much easier than it has been. He thought he'd be the irresistible force, and instead he's come up against the immoveable object. And now he's having to punt, to make concessions to the insurance companies to keep them from killing reform altogether. Well, Obama does have beautiful bed-room eyes. The immovable object is not the majority of the American people. We WANT cheaper single payer health care. When Obama and Baucus started making concessions before anyone went into committee, I became suspicious that health care
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip My argument with reframing is that it waters down the issue when Obama doesn't have to. He doesn't need to pretty the pig to please folks who are misinformed He needs to educate them. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. It doesn't water down the issue, it frames it more accurately and effectively. It puts the bull's eye on the insurance companies where it belongs. That's what people are complaining about; that's why reform is necessary. Health *care* doesn't need to be reformed, or at least not anywhere near so much as health *insurance* does. To me, that *is* educating the public, the first step, anyway. We'll have to disagree on this point. IMO Obama needs to educate the public about the lack of health care because of greedy insurance companies. AI!! But that's just what the frame health INSURANCE reform does! They are the reason we have lousy health care. What I'm trying to point out is that people with great insurance, or people with a lot of money who can afford to pay for health care out of pocket, have fine health care. It isn't the *care* that's the problem, it's *access* to it that's the problem. Health care reform suggests it's the *care* that's at fault; health INSURANCE reform puts the blame where it belongs. We don't have a lousy of insurance companies because of sick people. O.K. maybe this fails logical scrutiny. Yes, it does fail logical scrutiny. It fails mine, anyway! The bottom line is, it just doesn't feel right. It feels like a subtle double cross or that he cares more about placating insurance companies than he does about delivering health care. I think that's backwards. He wants to *get health care to those who need it*, but the insurance companies are standing in the way--that's why we need health INSURANCE reform. How does *reforming* insurance equate to placating the insurance companies? It seems just the opposite to me. The insurance companies don't *want* to be reformed. They don't like the new framing--that in itself should tell you something. Changing the frame in the middle of the game feels like fudging the facts. My stubbornness on this point is just a reflection of my lack of trust all along that we could get a decent health care bill. At this point it looks like we're getting co-ops instead of a public option and I'm not too hopeful about it. I still think this is a set up for something worse than what we have. You could very well be right, but none of that should lead you to oppose the health insurance reform frame. We can *use* that frame to push for a better plan. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/ten-things-obama-did-wrong-healthcare http://tinyurl.com/kpfgkt Great link Judy, thanks. Here's the kicker: 10) Don't negotiate from the middle, damn it. Ask for the moon and stars, and work your way toward the middle, or risk people thinking you're a corporatist tool. (Ahem.) That sums it up for me. Yup. And boy, did we ever *foresee* that's the way he was going to operate. snip He thought this was all going to be much easier than it has been. He thought he'd be the irresistible force, and instead he's come up against the immoveable object. And now he's having to punt, to make concessions to the insurance companies to keep them from killing reform altogether. Well, Obama does have beautiful bed-room eyes. The immovable object is not the majority of the American people. Right, it's the insurance companies and the health care industry generally. We WANT cheaper single payer health care. When Obama and Baucus started making concessions before anyone went into committee, I became suspicious that health care reform was going to tank. If Obama had been serious about single payer he should have taken his case directly to the American people. He should have indeed. I just think he assumed it was all going to be a lot easier than it was. That beer with the president made me want to threw something at the TV. Talk about getting off message! Geez. Pure Kabuki. Didn't do anything for the race message either. snip stuff I mostly agree with
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 12:53 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Hi Judy, You beat me to it. I was going to post Violet Sock's blog about this story which she says the media pretty much buried. Her take on it is that the dudes don't see it as a hate crime. I'm glad to see Bob Herbert write about it. That's the main reason I posted it. Some of the men on this forum seem to think the misogyny in this country and the resulting violence against women is just a feminist victim fantasy. Judy, the dudes on FFLife are a riot. Shemp shifts the conversation from Women at Risk to gun control. Then, without any irony he says, Guns are really beside the point. I'm still laughing. Rick gets into it with Shemp about lax gun control laws. He hits all the leftwing talking points denouncing: automatic weapons, assault rifles, bazookas, suitcase nukes and blasting caps. Does he denounce misogyny if given the opportunity? Of course he doesn't. An argument about gun control with Shemp is more important to him. Do we all have to chime in every time the misogyny topic comes up? Does my addressing the gun law issue instead of the topic of the thread mean I'm a misogynist? Have I said anything else to indicate that I am? I concur with your concerns, but I feel that you address them far more eloquently than I would be able to. I don't have as much time to post as some people here do, and I could never write posts as long as some do, so I don't comment on every post that shows up. Rick, Rattle on about anything you like. It doesn't mean you're a misogynist. I'm just making an observation that given the opportunity to weigh in on the topic you punt.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: Rick, Rattle on about anything you like. It doesn't mean you're a misogynist. I'm just making an observation that given the opportunity to weigh in on the topic you punt. Can you provide an actual example of this?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip We WANT to emphasize health insurance over health care. Health INSURANCE reform is *precisely* the right framing. All the health reform bloggers I've read are strongly in favor of it. snip My argument with reframing is that it waters down the issue when Obama doesn't have to. He doesn't need to pretty the pig to please folks who are misinformed He needs to educate them. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. It doesn't water down the issue, it frames it more accurately and effectively. It puts the bull's eye on the insurance companies where it belongs. That's what people are complaining about; that's why reform is necessary. Health *care* doesn't need to be reformed, or at least not anywhere near so much as health *insurance* does. To me, that *is* educating the public, the first step, anyway. We'll have to disagree on this point. IMO Obama needs to educate the public about the lack of health care because of greedy insurance companies. AI!! But that's just what the frame health INSURANCE reform does! O.K. Uncle. They are the reason we have lousy health care. What I'm trying to point out is that people with great insurance, or people with a lot of money who can afford to pay for health care out of pocket, have fine health care. It isn't the *care* that's the problem, it's *access* to it that's the problem. Correct. Health care reform suggests it's the *care* that's at fault; health INSURANCE reform puts the blame where it belongs. We don't have a lousy of insurance companies because of sick people. O.K. maybe this fails logical scrutiny. Yes, it does fail logical scrutiny. It fails mine, anyway! I knew that going down this road. The bottom line is, it just doesn't feel right. It feels like a subtle double cross or that he cares more about placating insurance companies than he does about delivering health care. I think that's backwards. He wants to *get health care to those who need it*, but the insurance companies are standing in the way--that's why we need health INSURANCE reform. How does *reforming* insurance equate to placating the insurance companies? It seems just the opposite to me. The insurance companies don't *want* to be reformed. They don't like the new framing--that in itself should tell you something. Correct assessment. The insurance companies don't like the new framing? Well, then that's O.K. by me. Changing the frame in the middle of the game feels like fudging the facts. My stubbornness on this point is just a reflection of my lack of trust all along that we could get a decent health care bill. At this point it looks like we're getting co-ops instead of a public option and I'm not too hopeful about it. I still think this is a set up for something worse than what we have. You could very well be right, but none of that should lead you to oppose the health insurance reform frame. We can *use* that frame to push for a better plan. I'm more pessimistic about the whole mess. I'm not so sure any kind of framing can push a better plan. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/ten-things-obama-did-wrong-healthcare http://tinyurl.com/kpfgkt Great link Judy, thanks. Here's the kicker: 10) Don't negotiate from the middle, damn it. Ask for the moon and stars, and work your way toward the middle, or risk people thinking you're a corporatist tool. (Ahem.) That sums it up for me. Yup. And boy, did we ever *foresee* that's the way he was going to operate. Empty suit. snip He thought this was all going to be much easier than it has been. He thought he'd be the irresistible force, and instead he's come up against the immoveable object. And now he's having to punt, to make concessions to the insurance companies to keep them from killing reform altogether. Well, Obama does have beautiful bed-room eyes. The immovable object is not the majority of the American people. Right, it's the insurance companies and the health care industry generally. Yep. We WANT cheaper single payer health care. When Obama and Baucus started making concessions before anyone went into committee, I became suspicious that health care reform was going to tank. If Obama had been serious about single payer he should have taken his case directly to the American people. He should have indeed. I just think he assumed it was all going to be a lot easier than it was. Yep. That beer with the president made me want to threw something at the TV. Talk about getting off message! Geez. Pure Kabuki. Didn't do anything for the race message either. Yep. snip stuff
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 9:46 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address Well, Obama does have beautiful bed-room eyes. The immovable object is not the majority of the American people. We WANT cheaper single payer health care. When Obama and Baucus started making concessions before anyone went into committee, I became suspicious that health care reform was going to tank. If Obama had been serious about single payer he should have taken his case directly to the American people. I agree with you on this one. I often fantasize asking Obama a question in a town hall meeting, and making the comment that in health care and every other area, he should aim for the ideal, then let the necessary negotiations and compromises cause the arrow to fall short of the target if need be. But if you aim half-way to the target, the arrow ends up a quarter of the way there. But look how pissed people are now over his compromised version of health care. What if he had attempted single payer? Would there be riots in the streets? Maybe he is in a better position than we to see what can realistically be attempted. Others have given it a lot more thought than I have, but I assume the route to single payer would have to involve a gradual transition to allow for the reemployment of the thousands (millions?) who work in the health insurance industry. It would be a massive transition. Do you think if he had attempted it he would have ended up with anything at all? Or would the entire attempt have been shot down? Maybe what we're seeing is that he IS taking the shortest doable route to single payer, and that by necessity it has to be circuitous and somewhat deceitful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Rick, Rattle on about anything you like. It doesn't mean you're a misogynist. I'm just making an observation that given the opportunity to weigh in on the topic you punt. Can you provide an actual example of this? Rick wrote: Do we all have to chime in every time the misogyny topic comes up? Does my addressing the gun law issue instead of the topic of the thread mean I'm a misogynist? Have I said anything else to indicate that I am? I concur with your concerns, but I feel that you address them far more eloquently than I would be able to. I don't have as much time to post as some people here do, and I could never write posts as long as some do, so I don't comment on every post that shows up. I call that a punt.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address
RIP single payer health care. Rick if you follow the discussion thread I've had with Judy, and the links we've posted, it could fill you in on some of the details. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 9:46 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Health Insurance Reform: President's Weekly Radio Address Well, Obama does have beautiful bed-room eyes. The immovable object is not the majority of the American people. We WANT cheaper single payer health care. When Obama and Baucus started making concessions before anyone went into committee, I became suspicious that health care reform was going to tank. If Obama had been serious about single payer he should have taken his case directly to the American people. I agree with you on this one. I often fantasize asking Obama a question in a town hall meeting, and making the comment that in health care and every other area, he should aim for the ideal, then let the necessary negotiations and compromises cause the arrow to fall short of the target if need be. But if you aim half-way to the target, the arrow ends up a quarter of the way there. But look how pissed people are now over his compromised version of health care. What if he had attempted single payer? Would there be riots in the streets? Maybe he is in a better position than we to see what can realistically be attempted. Others have given it a lot more thought than I have, but I assume the route to single payer would have to involve a gradual transition to allow for the reemployment of the thousands (millions?) who work in the health insurance industry. It would be a massive transition. Do you think if he had attempted it he would have ended up with anything at all? Or would the entire attempt have been shot down? Maybe what we're seeing is that he IS taking the shortest doable route to single payer, and that by necessity it has to be circuitous and somewhat deceitful.
[FairfieldLife] 'Jesus is Your Twin!'
According to the Book of Thomas;Discovered at Nag Hammadi; The Living Jesus addresses Thomas and you and me, As follows: 'Since you are my twin and my true companion,Examine yourself, and learn who you are...Since you will be called my [twin]... Although you do not yet understand it yet...You will be called 'The one who knows himself'.For whoever has not known himself knows nothing, But whoever has known himself has simultaneously...Come to know the depth of all things...
[FairfieldLife] Is the US on the Brink of Fascism?
http://www.truthout.org/080909A?n Article which eloquently makes a point I've tried to make a couple of times in the past week.
[FairfieldLife] Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 7, Verse 27
To All: Here's an excerpt of MMY's new book on the Gita: Bewildered by pairs of opposites arising from desire and aversion, O Bharat, all beings are born deeply deluded, O Scorcher of the Enemy. Commentary: People do not realize their absolute divine nature only because they are always overtaken by the dualities of life, arising from the various desires that always keep the mind engaged in the experience of the gross creation. Right from birth, remaining all the time in the experience of the gross means remaining all the time veiled in ignorance. But this does not in any way mean that all people have to remain in this ignorance. A simple way to get out of the field of ignorance has already been mentioned in Verse 45 of Chapter 2.
[FairfieldLife] BKS Iyenger Interview
To All: There must be something to yoga. He is now 90 years old and appears to be very strong still. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-wKYe2zLwAfeature=fvw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 7, Verse 27
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: To All: Here's an excerpt of MMY's new book on the Gita: Bewildered by pairs of opposites arising from desire and aversion, O Bharat, all beings are born deeply deluded, O Scorcher of the Enemy. Commentary: People do not realize their absolute divine nature only because they are always overtaken by the dualities of life, arising from the various desires that always keep the mind engaged in the experience of the gross creation. Right from birth, remaining all the time in the experience of the gross means remaining all the time veiled in ignorance. But this does not in any way mean that all people have to remain in this ignorance. A simple way to get out of the field of ignorance has already been mentioned in Verse 45 of Chapter 2. To be born in a physical body at all is a clue that man is in soul ignorance and has not realized his identity as formless Spirit. (The exceptions are masters who return here at God's command to guide their stumbling brothers.) To breath at all is the breath in 'maya'. Thus from their very birth children are exposed to cosmic delusion and grow up helplessly under it. God gives them delusion first, and not Himself, in order to carry on His dramatic scheme of creation. If He did not cover Himself with the veils of maya, there could be no Cosmic Game of creation, in which men play hide-and-seek with Him and try to find Him as the Grand Prize. Paramahansa Yogananda Gita CHVII vs27 (excerpt)
[FairfieldLife] Re: So you wanna talk about Hitler...
I think John Manning should, again, reiterate that it is NOT his grandfather or family that is referred to herein as a Nazi. John, it was NOT clear the way you pasted the story that it wasn't about your family. I had to read through in order to dispel that notion. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: = My grandfather was a devout Nazi until his death in 1989. He never talked about killing anyone nor did he have any leading role during the Third Reich (he was an engineering teacher), but there was always that hostility toward all things foreign, toward liberal ideas, toward socialists (and in post-war Germany, Social Democrats). Sound familiar? [snip] You couldn't be a Nazi without killing anyone... The main ingredient of Nazism, was murder, and the accompanying fear, which cause people to do all kinds of gruesome stuff... Hitler devoted himself to being an agent of evil, and to that end, he drove the world where he lived, into the dust... He is so regarded in Germany as such a mockery of everything human, that the very mention of him or anything he stood for, is expressly against German Law... My father joined up to fight these bastards, when he was seventeen years old...like many Americans did, during that era... If your Grandfather had been in his way, he would have had a shorter stay here... They were called to defend the world against this vile expression of the lowest form of life... Hitler was a drug addict, a sexual pervert, a sadist/machocist, and every other vile thing, which is possible to think of... He and his coherts were heartless and soul-less by the time they were finished with their evil deeds...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Judy , I rest my case. Yeah, it wasn't even necessary for Judy to see 45,500 hits on the huffingtonpost.com to be convinced that liberals use the nazi and hitler comparison time and again. All she had to do was stay right here in FFL! --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Robert babajii...@... wrote: From: Robert babajii...@... Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fucking hypocrite Huffington To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:38 AM --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: Limbaugh's use of *Nazi* was in response to Pelosi's insinuation that the protesters at town hall meetings were Nazis. ie they were carrying swastikas,which the media payed little attention to. The *Barrack the Magic Negro* song was a parody of an article in the L.A. Times and concerns of self appointed African/American leaders who questioned whether Obama was *black* enough to represent African/Americans. Limbaugh is a master of turning the words of liberals back on themselves. (snip) Like Hitler, he is a master at causing confusion, fear and chaos... He is tapped into the same force of lies, distortions, prejudice, fear, lust, greed and is a megalomaniac like the evil doers of the past... If we don't learn from the past, we will be doomed to repeat it... Rush and his friends are mirroring the last throes of Nazism in complete retreat...bankrupte d and exposed for the dead -end it is... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: BKS Iyenger Interview
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: To All: There must be something to yoga. He is now 90 years old and appears to be very strong still. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-wKYe2zLwAfeature=fvw Here he is doing pranayama or breath control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcPjvp4La8A (Sanskrit: pr#257;#7751;#257;y#257;ma) is a Sanskrit word meaning restraint of the prana or breath. The word is composed of two Sanskrit words, Pr#257;na, life force, or vital energy, particularly, the breath, and #257;y#257;ma, to suspend or restrain.
[FairfieldLife] English sounds quite like German...
...when spoken like it's written?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMX3zxEa6ENR=1
