Warren Ockrassa wrote: > On Sep 4, 2005, at 11:51 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote: > >> I do know that it really bothered me after the tsunami that it >> never >> was discussed, and I don't think varying grief modes can explain >> that. > > FWIW, one of the things I'm fairly conscious of is that noises of > sympathy are just that; they can't really do much materially to > help.
Well,... Thank You, I'm Sorry, Your Welcome, and Please are noises that don't do much materially, but just the same are expected. > Certainly letting a person know that s/he's thought of is helpful > *to > that person's outlook*, but I also know the odds are vanishingly > small > that any comment I might make will reach anyone. > > To me something like "My heart goes out to this or that groupÂ…" is a > little like "I'm praying for this or that groupÂ…" It just doesn't > carry the weight with me that it might with others, so I tend not to > say > such things. It's not for lack of caring; it's because I know that > sometimes words just don't help. You mean like the Presidents daily promises of aid that never seemed to arrive? By last Wednsday words were making me angry and my mood was quite foul and that has a lot to do with why I've said things I've said. (Apologies again for my insulting tone) In June of 2001 Houston suffered a massive flood and Fema arrived to help in a reasonable amount of time, and then provided a lot of aid. Since Fema has been folded into Homeland Security it seems like they cannot do anything right. As many people around here dislike Bush and the administration, there were things that could have been discussed beyond Daves AOL chatroom example. It occurs on pretty much every mailing list I am on (except for the few that are heavily moderated for on-topic content). I don't see reason that this list is a special case in that regard. xponent The Content Is Out There Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
