[FairfieldLife] Re: "Homeland" Preview

[turquoiseb]

Interesting that the preview version has been "bleeped
and blurred." The torrent version wasn't...Moreena looks
pretty good nekkid. :-)

The show itself is by one of the producers of "24" and
for my money shares too much of that series mindset,
that "breaking the law in the pursuit of terrorists
is no evil." Same thing, just Claire Danes doing it
instead of Jack Bauer doing it. As you say, neither
as smart nor as well done as "Rubicon."


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> "Homeland" is Showtime's new series which debuts on October 2nd right 
> after "Dexter".   It stars Claire Danes, Damian Lewis, Mandy Patinkin 
> and Morena Baccarin ("Firefly","V").  It
> centers on Marine Sergeant Nicholas Brody, who returns home eight years 
> after going missing in Iraq, and Carrie Anderson, a driven (and possibly 
> unstable) CIA officer who suspects he might be plotting an attack on 
> America.
> 
> You can watch the free preview over at Sho.com.  It's been "edited" 
> which means that the "bad" words have been bleeped out and the nudes 
> scenes (with Baccarin) have been blurred.  It's based on an Israeli 
> series and produced by Howard Gordon ("24").  The pilot was okay, not as 
> smart as "Rubicon" though.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1796960/
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[maskedzebra]

I'd love to see this on YouTube. There is so much that is unreal that goes on 
in the classroom: seems to me those kids got educated a little right inside 
their souls. When you [Curtis] discuss everything other than the blues, I feel 
belief, faith, intelligence, conviction. When you write about the blues, it's 
all inspiration, and I feel it go right into me. Your understanding of the 
blues, your ability to sing the blues: this is a principle of knowing and 
acting that should be the basis of a true religious sensibility. If you can't 
produce evidence of something as deep and real as Curtis's connection to the 
blues, well, man, it ain't the man upstairs you be talk'n' about. And you do 
all this without making a deal with the devil. [I guess as a scientist you 
throw out that rumour about how Robert Johnson got to be so good—the rumour 
prevalent among blacks who knew him.] I'd like to hear how a black blues singer 
expresses his notion of what's going on when Curtis plays the blues—or even 
discusses the blues. How could he/she experience anything other than: this 
white man; he knows what's going on. He know exactly what is going on. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> Too kind as usual Robin, but much appreciated.
> 
> I just came back from a showcase for a local school district and was once 
> again amazed to see kids, so far from this period of music, totally rocking 
> out to blues as if I were some sort of Justin Bieber mixed with some old guy 
> in an acid reflux ad!  I had them chopping along to the rhythms to 
> demonstrate how the ax song rhythms evolved into rock as I sped up the song 
> up for the second verse, and they struggled to chop fast enough to keep up.  
> Blues is the sound of how humans feel.  Not the only one.  But one of the 
> most predictably effective I have found. It hacks right through to the 
> operating system, deep in the mammalian brain, where words are feelings, and 
> rhythms express the joys and struggles of being human.  I could blab about 
> blues so long I had to turn it into a job!
> 
> Thanks again for appreciating the music I love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Curtis,
> > 
> > When you write about the blues, I am immediately enthralled. I can't help 
> > myself; it is my impression, therefore, that on this topic especially, you 
> > tell 'the truth' in the most compelling why it could be told (first person 
> > perspective). I am reminded of my first experience when you posted 
> > (answering me) about the blues. I have never—in the happiest sense—ever 
> > recovered from that—as I discover in reading this post of yours.
> > 
> > What you amount to (very subjectively construed by *my* first person 
> > perspective of course) really gets expressed when you write about the 
> > blues. This one post to Alex Stanley holds within itself (for those who can 
> > apprehend this) the evidence of a human being who is living out his life in 
> > the most real way that is possible. You are (as everyone on FFL knows) 
> > impressive in *all* your posts; but when it comes to discussing the 
> > blues—and your music—you have the last word. So true, so deep, so keenly 
> > felt.
> > 
> > I wish I could write a post which does justice to the gift I feel is given 
> > to me when I read a post like this one.
> > 
> > Amazing. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a 
> > > > Lebanese guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no 
> > > > reason why the right hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.
> > > > 
> > > > Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are 
> > > > two different types of music that originated in the African-American 
> > > > community, and it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. 
> > > > Yet, when I hear white guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like 
> > > > they're gangsta black guys from an urban ghetto, I cringe with 
> > > > embarrassment for them. At least Eminem has some cred due to his 
> > > > Detroit upbringing, but little white boy rappers who grew up in 
> > > > Fairfield Iowa just strike me as completely ridiculous. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I know what you mean.  I prefer white rappers who sound like white guys, 
> > > like Kid Rock.  But I am an Emenem fan too so I figure that authenticity 
> > > comes from a lot of different levels.  My favorite reaps comes from 
> > > Jamaica or the Caribbean. I like Nicki Minaj's slightly softer lilting 
> > > take on the form.   
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically 
> > > > born of the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the 
> > > > passage of time that gives a musical

[FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[seekliberation]

regarding 'evil' materialists, I wouldn't call them 'evil'.  From my 
understanding, we're all in a cycle of birth and death.  Some of our souls have 
been around much longer and therefore have less anxiety than others when it 
comes to our material needs.  To regard a younger soul as 'evil' kind of 
reverts us back to fundamentalist thinking of 'us vs. them'.  

I don't regard materialistic people, as irritating as I find them, to be evil.  
It's just like when you and I were in the 3rd grade.  Some kids paid attention 
and learned, some kids played games, some kids ate paste, some kids went to the 
principals office, etc

But in the end, we can't really say which kids in the 3rd grade are going to 
end up well, or which ones will end up bad.  Some valedictorians turn out 
horribly, while some drop-outs turn out winners.

The same is with all humans.  You and I, whether we like this or not, could 
potentially be 50, 100, maybe even 3000 lifetimes behind Donald Trump (or 
anyone else who I catch myself referring to as a materialistic asshole) when it 
comes to getting out of this cycle of birth and death.  To assume otherwise is 
a combination of mere speculation and arrogance.  You and I really have no idea 
where we stand in this cycle of birth and death.  I'd like to think this is my 
last lifetime, or at least close.  But truthfully, i have no clue.  And I 
definitely have no idea where I stand in relation to materialists.  To assume 
I'm ahead of them is nothing more than wishful thinking combined with egotism.

One analogy I remember is that this world is like a prison for our souls.  
Until our consciousness gets to a point where we cause no problems to others, 
or ourselves, we're pretty much unwanted in better worlds (IE: Heaven, 
Vaikuntha, Zion, whatever you like to call the 'ideal' afterlife).  At times, 
our souls will become obsessed with materialism.  Yours and mine probably have 
in the past, and may do so in the future for all we know.  We don't necessarily 
have control over where we will be incarnate, or under what circumstances.  

To become so upset towards materialists is no different than hating the rich 
kid in your neighborhood when you were growing up.  I remember having that 
feeling when I was young, but as I grew older, I relaxed when I realized that 
their 'better' state as a child didn't really serve them well in the long run.  
No reason to hate them or call them 'evil' or draw any lines in the sand.  Just 
let karma fall in place.

seekliberation 



 I don't think it interferes with spiritual growth at all.  In fact I 
> believe that spiritual people should face these issues head on and help 
> rid the world of the evil materialists messing  up things.  Cowards 
> don't win and may wake up surrounded by some pretty ugly American made 
> goblins if they don't watch out.
> 

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Ravi Yogi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> "Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
> negativity yagya or two or three... I wonder if this is considered black 
> magic? I'd find it hard to believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT 
> practicing these kinds of rituals."
> 
> Vaj, I have it on unimpeachable authority that no black magic is practiced by 
> the Vedic pundits of FF. They want to, but the inordinate amount of time 
> already devoted to human sacrifices makes it impractical. By the way, which 
> sutra have you been repeating to transform you into a jackass? :-)
> 

LOL, thanks for the laughs. I blurted out laughing at this with the people here 
at the Thai restaurant wondering what I find funny about the food.  They can't 
see the entertainment value of Vaj's stale offerings :-(.


> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > >
> > >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
> > > negativity yagya or two or three.
> > 
> > I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to  
> > believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds  
> > of rituals.
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya- 
> > defeating-enemies
> > 
> > Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> > YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> > A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away  
> > with the help of this yagya.
> > 
> > Category:
> > 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> > 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Troy Davis execution proceeds

[authfriend]

Supremes took *four hours* to decide to reject the
request for a stay. Why didn't that in and of itself
suggest to them that "beyond a reasonable doubt"
didn't apply in this case?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[Bhairitu]

On 09/21/2011 06:39 PM, seekliberation wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> People who employ a significant amount of people run businesses and
>> under those rules get deductions.  What we're talking about is literally
>> "take home pay" that is very high.
>
> Out of simplicity, I erased a lot of your text.
>
> I'm pretty much in agreement with you about the 'type' of rich people you're 
> talking about.  Big businesses that employ a lot of people, I tend to have no 
> problem with.  It's all these hollwood actors, musicians, and politicians who 
> I know damn well make well over 500k per year (or a lot more) and get caught 
> cheating on their taxes (ex: Paul Hogan, Charles Rangel, Wesley Snipes, 
> Willie Nelson, Obama's appointed treasurer,&  the list goes on and on and 
> on).  These people have plenty of money for their basic needs and then 
> somebut scam out on their taxes anyway.  A legitimate complaint, in my 
> book.

Some of that is the entertainment people not watching their 
accountants.  I don't even do my own taxes.  They are all handled by a 
CPA but I do have to review them.   The people I don't like are the ones 
trying to move the country toward fascism because apparently they are 
evil, heartless and hate people.  We sorta forgot to keep check on such 
types.

> I beleive the only point that I was making is that all of yours and my 
> complaints about these financial and economic woes has little or nothing to 
> do with separating our conscious mind from everyday material life.  In fact, 
> our frustration with all this really interferes with our spirituality and 
> possibly brings our evolution to a halt, or at least slows down dramitically. 
>  The situation here in America could get 10 times worse than it is now, and 
> you and I could both still make monumental spiritual progress in this 
> lifetime.  I don't believe this current economic situation is as much a 
> threat as it seems in the grand scheme of this cycle of birth and death and 
> the progress that our souls are making.

I don't think it interferes with spiritual growth at all.  In fact I 
believe that spiritual people should face these issues head on and help 
rid the world of the evil materialists messing  up things.  Cowards 
don't win and may wake up surrounded by some pretty ugly American made 
goblins if they don't watch out.

The current economic situation is very bad.  The conditions of which are 
far under reported.  Thing is you could let the whole thing collapse.  
It would mainly hurt the rich and those attached to their material 
assets.  We could wind up with a much simpler world with food and goods 
provided locally.  We have an overflow of technology which we could 
keep.  Just cut out the AT&Ts and Comcasts of the world.  Run it all 
locally.  And this should have begun in fall 2008 when the impact would 
have been far less on the general public.  But congress got snowed by 
the financial community and screwed the pooch.

So it goes.

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

Just had to ask...:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > PS Do you know Snookie?? 
> 
> That girl on "Jersey Shore"? Nope. Seaside Heights and the whole Guido thing 
> is 10 miles south and worlds apart. Mantoloking and the next town north, Bay 
> Head, are WASPy upper crusty.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[seekliberation]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> People who employ a significant amount of people run businesses and 
> under those rules get deductions.  What we're talking about is literally 
> "take home pay" that is very high.


Out of simplicity, I erased a lot of your text.

I'm pretty much in agreement with you about the 'type' of rich people you're 
talking about.  Big businesses that employ a lot of people, I tend to have no 
problem with.  It's all these hollwood actors, musicians, and politicians who I 
know damn well make well over 500k per year (or a lot more) and get caught 
cheating on their taxes (ex: Paul Hogan, Charles Rangel, Wesley Snipes, Willie 
Nelson, Obama's appointed treasurer, & the list goes on and on and on).  These 
people have plenty of money for their basic needs and then somebut scam out 
on their taxes anyway.  A legitimate complaint, in my book.

I beleive the only point that I was making is that all of yours and my 
complaints about these financial and economic woes has little or nothing to do 
with separating our conscious mind from everyday material life.  In fact, our 
frustration with all this really interferes with our spirituality and possibly 
brings our evolution to a halt, or at least slows down dramitically.  The 
situation here in America could get 10 times worse than it is now, and you and 
I could both still make monumental spiritual progress in this lifetime.  I 
don't believe this current economic situation is as much a threat as it seems 
in the grand scheme of this cycle of birth and death and the progress that our 
souls are making.  

seekliberation

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Hagelin lecture Tonight

[John]

Hey Buck,

We're curious about what Hagelin said in the lecture.  Can you write a brief 
summary as to the relationship between supermassive black holes and 
enlightenment?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Sunday nite
> > > 8pm, Dalby Hall 
> > > on MUM campus.
> > > 
> > > Super Black Holes
> > > and Enlightenment
> > > 
> > > Supposedly open to everyone.
> > >
> > 
> > How was it?
> > 
> > 
> > L
> >
> 
> It was very well attended. Overflowing crowd. 
> Jai Guru Dev, -Buck
>

[FairfieldLife] Pat Boone Is Becoming Senile

[John]

He insists Obama was born in Kenya.

http://news.yahoo.com/singer-pat-boone-insists-obama-born-kenya-141751702.htm

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> PS Do you know Snookie?? 

That girl on "Jersey Shore"? Nope. Seaside Heights and the whole Guido thing is 
10 miles south and worlds apart. Mantoloking and the next town north, Bay Head, 
are WASPy upper crusty.

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Sep 17 00:00:00 2011
End Date (UTC): Sat Sep 24 00:00:00 2011
508 messages as of (UTC) Thu Sep 22 00:08:58 2011

48 authfriend 
40 whynotnow7 
39 Mark Landau 
32 Yifu 
32 RoryGoff 
31 curtisdeltablues 
29 obbajeeba 
26 Buck 
24 Bhairitu 
23 maskedzebra 
22 nablusoss1008 
21 seventhray1 
17 turquoiseb 
12 richardwillytexwilliams 
12 Vaj 
10 merudanda 
 9 cardemaister 
 9 Alex Stanley 
 8 Sal Sunshine 
 8 Marcio 
 7 Rick Archer 
 6 wgm4u 
 6 Denise Evans 
 5 PaliGap 
 4 Bob Price 
 3 emptybill 
 2 shukra69 
 2 seekliberation 
 2 oye34vay 
 2 jpgillam 
 2 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 2 Tom Pall 
 2 Ravi Yogi 
 2 John 
 1 yifuxero 
 1 sparaig 
 1 pranamoocher 
 1 WilliamG 
 1 wle...@aol.com
 1 Paulo Barbosa 
 1 Mike Dixon 
 1 "martin.quickman" 
 1 "do.rflex" 

Posters: 43
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] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

Cool. Yeah, when I thought about you and The Fairfield Scene, it was a 
disconnect, kind of figured that it was the open space you enjoyed in FF, or 
just outside it. Can't beat that!! Thanks, Alex! PS Do you know Snookie?? 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex, I am curious what attracts you to Fairfield? Are you
> > from the Midwest?
> > 
> 
> I grew up in Princeton NJ and the Jersey Shore. I moved to FF in Aug 1982, 
> right around my 21st birthday. I like the community and the peaceful quality 
> of life out here. There are no traffic jams or road rage. Crime is low. We 
> have a nice house on 190 acres, with two large ponds that we can see from the 
> house. MUM could be sold and the domes turned into hog confinements, and I'd 
> still live here.
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I grew up in Princeton NJ and the Jersey Shore.
> > 
> > Didn't know that. Where on the shore, if I may ask?
> 
> House on the beach in Mantoloking.

Ooh, classy. I'm about 20 miles north, a block from the
beach, middle-classy. I skedaddled to Princeton during
the hurricane. Didn't get to see any of it, though.

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> Yeah, I see what you mean.  Tiny percentage of Westerners,
> large percentage of TMers.

'Zactly.

> And yes the beliefs of the general population (in the US)
> like 45% the believe in a young earth.

BTW, when you mentioned this earlier, I went and looked
it up and found a Gallup poll from December 2010 that
was a bit less dire (meant to post it then and forgot):

"A small minority of Americans hold the 'secular evolution' view that humans 
evolved with no influence from God -- but the number has risen from 9% in 1982 
to 16% today. At the same time, the 40% of Americans who hold the 'creationist' 
view that God created humans as is 10,000 years ago is the lowest in Gallup's 
history of asking this question, and down from a high point of 47% in 1993 and 
1999. There has been little change over the years in the percentage holding the 
'theistic evolution' view that humans evolved under God's guidance.

"Americans' views on human origins vary significantly by level of education and 
religiosity. Those who are less educated are more likely to hold a creationist 
view. Those with college degrees and postgraduate education are more likely to 
hold one of the two viewpoints involving evolution."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/Four-Americans-Believe-Strict-Creationism.aspx

http://tinyurl.com/3afmxnu

So the numbers are going in the right direction, at least.

Also, the question Gallup asked was strictly about the
creation and development of human beings, not about the
age of the earth per se. It's conceivable that some of 
the respondents would believe God created humans "as is"
around 10,000 years ago but would balk at the earth being
that young. Plus which, there was no alternative in which
God might have created humans "as is" longer ago than
10,000 years. Anyone who didn't like the idea that humans
evolved from "lower" animals had only one choice; they
were stuck with 10,000 years ago.

IOW, I'm not sure this question nailed the percentage who
believe in "young earth creationism." The views in
question may be more nuanced and not *quite* as ignorant.

I also found this interesting point on another site:

"Those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible attempt to follow eternal 
Biblical truths. However, they seem to have great difficulty in settling on a 
single understanding of the origins and development of plant and animal 
species. They have ended up with many different conflicting theories which 
cannot be harmonized. Meanwhile, the scientific community has arrived at an 
almost complete consensus in the theory of evolution. As new evidence is found, 
some details of the evolution of species are occasionally modified. Yet 
supporters of naturalistic evolution long ago reached a consensus on the 
overall evolutionary process."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_world1.htm

The site has a fairly lengthy discussion of the kinds of
conflicting theories involved in deciphering what, exactly,
the Bible says about creation.




> Still flying was a pretty big hop and I for one made it.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > [I wrote:]
> > > > The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
> > > > Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
> > > > say "TMer Westerners"?
> > > 
> > > This is where your attempt to find something wrong kind of
> > > betrays you.
> > 
> >  Poor victimized Curtis. I made a minor point
> > questioning your wording, which you could have conceded
> > easily without changing your point, but instead you've
> > blown it way up into a big deal.
> > 
> > > Yes Judy, I believe that anyone here might know that I was
> > > speaking about the only group I know of that sells techniques
> > > of yogic flying
> > 
> > Translation: Yes, I meant to say "TMer Westerners."
> > (Or "Western TMers" or whatever.)
> > 
> > A *minuscule* percentage of Westerners. *Very few*
> > Westerners have this belief. You were marveling
> > recently about the 45 percent of Americans who
> > believe in creationism; *that* is amazing. This ain't.
> > It's not really even curious. It's just one example of
> > a whole host of unlikely beliefs held by various
> > groups of people, and in this case a smaller group
> > than many. Harold Camping's group was (I think) bigger.
> > 
> > Nothing wrong with your point; you just, as I said,
> > overstated it, that's all.

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> wrote:
> 
> > I grew up in Princeton NJ and the Jersey Shore.
> 
> Didn't know that. Where on the shore, if I may ask?
>

House on the beach in Mantoloking.

[FairfieldLife] Two-thirds of Americans want taxes raised on the rich

[Bhairitu]

At least two-thirds of Americans believe that high income earners should 
be taxed at a larger rate, according to a recent poll from Gallup about 
Obama's jobs plan proposals.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/21/poll-two-thirds-of-americans-want-taxes-raised-on-the-rich/

Now what do our FFL "wannabe billionaires" have to say?

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:

> I grew up in Princeton NJ and the Jersey Shore.

Didn't know that. Where on the shore, if I may ask?

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Hi Alex, I am curious what attracts you to Fairfield? Are you
> from the Midwest?
> 

I grew up in Princeton NJ and the Jersey Shore. I moved to FF in Aug 1982, 
right around my 21st birthday. I like the community and the peaceful quality of 
life out here. There are no traffic jams or road rage. Crime is low. We have a 
nice house on 190 acres, with two large ponds that we can see from the house. 
MUM could be sold and the domes turned into hog confinements, and I'd still 
live here.

[FairfieldLife] "Homeland" Preview

[Bhairitu]

"Homeland" is Showtime's new series which debuts on October 2nd right 
after "Dexter".   It stars Claire Danes, Damian Lewis, Mandy Patinkin 
and Morena Baccarin ("Firefly","V").  It
centers on Marine Sergeant Nicholas Brody, who returns home eight years 
after going missing in Iraq, and Carrie Anderson, a driven (and possibly 
unstable) CIA officer who suspects he might be plotting an attack on 
America.

You can watch the free preview over at Sho.com.  It's been "edited" 
which means that the "bad" words have been bleeped out and the nudes 
scenes (with Baccarin) have been blurred.  It's based on an Israeli 
series and produced by Howard Gordon ("24").  The pilot was okay, not as 
smart as "Rubicon" though.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1796960/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Protection from black magic/Tantra

[whynotnow7]

"prevent the birth of an enemy."  Roe vs. Wade or Trojan?

HG Wells, "The Time Machine".:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> WOW!  I mean WOY! That is really one heck of a webpage!  If I had any money 
> left from the last ones I did, I could do more!
> 
> "prevent the birth of an enemy."  Roe vs. Wade or Trojan?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > I'll lend you mine - much cheaper - "prevent the birth of an enemy" - works 
> > like a charm; integration before opposition. :-)
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there one I can buy to protect from the Alliance?
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Vag forgot to add that you can be "protected" from tantra
> > > > and even at a $200 discount!
> > > > 
> > > > Yagya for Prevention from black magic /Tantra
> > > >  > > > on-black-magic-tantra>Let's take certain measures
> > > > and protections by way of rituals and pooja prevent you from black
> > > > magic.
> > > > Category:
> > > > 'A' category, 5 days, 7 pundits: 551 USD 'B' category, 3 days, 5
> > > > pundits: 451 USD 'C' category, 2 days, 5 pundits: 351 USD
> > > > 
> > > > Guess this means my Vajrakila and Yamaantaka puja-s
> > > > won't work anymore.
> > > > 
> > > > How about Yagya for Defeating the Enemies?
> > > >  > > > g-enemies> : A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is
> > > > taken away with the help of this yagya.
> > > > 
> > > > Let's see, taken away ...by the Yamaduta-s?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Sorta like Mafia mechanics when they give you a "ride".
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of
> > > > > > negativity yagya or two or three.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to
> > > > > believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds
> > > > > of rituals.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya-
> > > > > defeating-enemies
> > > > >
> > > > > Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> > > > > YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> > > > > A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away
> > > > > with the help of this yagya.
> > > > >
> > > > > Category:
> > > > > 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> > > > > 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[whynotnow7]

Does anyone know how many sidhas there were? I heard 15K but that was 25 years 
ago.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> 
> [I wrote:]
> > > The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
> > > Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
> > > say "TMer Westerners"?
> > 
> > This is where your attempt to find something wrong kind of
> > betrays you.
> 
>  Poor victimized Curtis. I made a minor point
> questioning your wording, which you could have conceded
> easily without changing your point, but instead you've
> blown it way up into a big deal.
> 
> > Yes Judy, I believe that anyone here might know that I was
> > speaking about the only group I know of that sells techniques
> > of yogic flying
> 
> Translation: Yes, I meant to say "TMer Westerners."
> (Or "Western TMers" or whatever.)
> 
> A *minuscule* percentage of Westerners. *Very few*
> Westerners have this belief. You were marveling
> recently about the 45 percent of Americans who
> believe in creationism; *that* is amazing. This ain't.
> It's not really even curious. It's just one example of
> a whole host of unlikely beliefs held by various
> groups of people, and in this case a smaller group
> than many. Harold Camping's group was (I think) bigger.
> 
> Nothing wrong with your point; you just, as I said,
> overstated it, that's all.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Protection from black magic/Tantra

[obbajeeba]

WOW!  I mean WOY! That is really one heck of a webpage!  If I had any money 
left from the last ones I did, I could do more!

"prevent the birth of an enemy."  Roe vs. Wade or Trojan?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> I'll lend you mine - much cheaper - "prevent the birth of an enemy" - works 
> like a charm; integration before opposition. :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
> >
> > Is there one I can buy to protect from the Alliance?
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Vag forgot to add that you can be "protected" from tantra
> > > and even at a $200 discount!
> > > 
> > > Yagya for Prevention from black magic /Tantra
> > >  > > on-black-magic-tantra>Let's take certain measures
> > > and protections by way of rituals and pooja prevent you from black
> > > magic.
> > > Category:
> > > 'A' category, 5 days, 7 pundits: 551 USD 'B' category, 3 days, 5
> > > pundits: 451 USD 'C' category, 2 days, 5 pundits: 351 USD
> > > 
> > > Guess this means my Vajrakila and Yamaantaka puja-s
> > > won't work anymore.
> > > 
> > > How about Yagya for Defeating the Enemies?
> > >  > > g-enemies> : A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is
> > > taken away with the help of this yagya.
> > > 
> > > Let's see, taken away ...by the Yamaduta-s?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sorta like Mafia mechanics when they give you a "ride".
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of
> > > > > negativity yagya or two or three.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to
> > > > believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds
> > > > of rituals.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya-
> > > > defeating-enemies
> > > >
> > > > Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> > > > YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> > > > A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away
> > > > with the help of this yagya.
> > > >
> > > > Category:
> > > > 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> > > > 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[curtisdeltablues]

Yeah, I see what you mean.  Tiny percentage of Westerners, large percentage of 
TMers. 

And yes the beliefs of the general population (in the US) like 45% the believe 
in a young earth.

Still flying was a pretty big hop and I for one made it.




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> 
> [I wrote:]
> > > The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
> > > Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
> > > say "TMer Westerners"?
> > 
> > This is where your attempt to find something wrong kind of
> > betrays you.
> 
>  Poor victimized Curtis. I made a minor point
> questioning your wording, which you could have conceded
> easily without changing your point, but instead you've
> blown it way up into a big deal.
> 
> > Yes Judy, I believe that anyone here might know that I was
> > speaking about the only group I know of that sells techniques
> > of yogic flying
> 
> Translation: Yes, I meant to say "TMer Westerners."
> (Or "Western TMers" or whatever.)
> 
> A *minuscule* percentage of Westerners. *Very few*
> Westerners have this belief. You were marveling
> recently about the 45 percent of Americans who
> believe in creationism; *that* is amazing. This ain't.
> It's not really even curious. It's just one example of
> a whole host of unlikely beliefs held by various
> groups of people, and in this case a smaller group
> than many. Harold Camping's group was (I think) bigger.
> 
> Nothing wrong with your point; you just, as I said,
> overstated it, that's all.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[authfriend]

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

[I wrote:]
> > The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
> > Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
> > say "TMer Westerners"?
> 
> This is where your attempt to find something wrong kind of
> betrays you.

 Poor victimized Curtis. I made a minor point
questioning your wording, which you could have conceded
easily without changing your point, but instead you've
blown it way up into a big deal.

> Yes Judy, I believe that anyone here might know that I was
> speaking about the only group I know of that sells techniques
> of yogic flying

Translation: Yes, I meant to say "TMer Westerners."
(Or "Western TMers" or whatever.)

A *minuscule* percentage of Westerners. *Very few*
Westerners have this belief. You were marveling
recently about the 45 percent of Americans who
believe in creationism; *that* is amazing. This ain't.
It's not really even curious. It's just one example of
a whole host of unlikely beliefs held by various
groups of people, and in this case a smaller group
than many. Harold Camping's group was (I think) bigger.

Nothing wrong with your point; you just, as I said,
overstated it, that's all.

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Hagelin lecture Tonight

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> Sunday nite
> 8pm, Dalby Hall 
> on MUM campus.
> 
> Super Black Holes
> and Enlightenment

FWIW:

- gam = to go
- aa-gam = to come
- daa  =  to give
- aa-daa = to take
- kaash = shine
- aa-kaash = "to shine inwards", "" counter-shine""??? :D

How does a thing look like when it "shines inwards"?
I believe, pitch black, like a black hole, and
kRSna.

BTW, I've heard that Naagaarjuna (naaga-arjuna: snake-white >
white snake??) is often depicted black??


> 
> Supposedly open to everyone.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Protection from black magic/Tantra

[whynotnow7]

I'll lend you mine - much cheaper - "prevent the birth of an enemy" - works 
like a charm; integration before opposition. :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> Is there one I can buy to protect from the Alliance?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> >
> > Vag forgot to add that you can be "protected" from tantra
> > and even at a $200 discount!
> > 
> > Yagya for Prevention from black magic /Tantra
> >  > on-black-magic-tantra>Let's take certain measures
> > and protections by way of rituals and pooja prevent you from black
> > magic.
> > Category:
> > 'A' category, 5 days, 7 pundits: 551 USD 'B' category, 3 days, 5
> > pundits: 451 USD 'C' category, 2 days, 5 pundits: 351 USD
> > 
> > Guess this means my Vajrakila and Yamaantaka puja-s
> > won't work anymore.
> > 
> > How about Yagya for Defeating the Enemies?
> >  > g-enemies> : A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is
> > taken away with the help of this yagya.
> > 
> > Let's see, taken away ...by the Yamaduta-s?
> > 
> > 
> > Sorta like Mafia mechanics when they give you a "ride".
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of
> > > > negativity yagya or two or three.
> > >
> > > I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to
> > > believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds
> > > of rituals.
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya-
> > > defeating-enemies
> > >
> > > Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> > > YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> > > A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away
> > > with the help of this yagya.
> > >
> > > Category:
> > > 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> > > 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

Hi Alex, I am curious what attracts you to Fairfield? Are you from the Midwest?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> > wrote:
> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:11 PM
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re:
> > > > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't
> > > > > they?
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know whether they do so in an official, organized way,
> > > > but they're well-aware of it. Sometimes something will be posted
> > > > here that may have implications for some project the movement has
> > > > in the works, and I'll get feedback within the hour from someone
> > > > in the movement asking to take a post down, set the record
> > > > straight, etc.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > My brother is aware of FFL. He wasn't terribly impressed.>
> > 
> > Perhaps he might see us in a more favorable light if we all agreed
> > to wear party hats? I've been wanting to try this new Burger King
> > monstrosity anyway, so let me know if anyone needs me to pick them
> > up something to wear that would be Raja-worthy.
> > 
> 
> With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a 
> Lebanese guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no reason why 
> the right hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.
> 
> Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are two 
> different types of music that originated in the African-American community, 
> and it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. Yet, when I hear 
> white guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like they're gangsta black guys 
> from an urban ghetto, I cringe with embarrassment for them. At least Eminem 
> has some cred due to his Detroit upbringing, but little white boy rappers who 
> grew up in Fairfield Iowa just strike me as completely ridiculous. 
> 
> I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically born 
> of the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the passage of 
> time that gives a musical style some distance from the unique cultural 
> situation that gave rise to it?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama a machine avatar in his next incarnation?

[whynotnow7]

"Dumped By A Dildo", the heartbreaking tale of Turq when he discovers his ex 
thinks he's just another dickhead. :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Is that your excuse for not having a girlfriend?:-)
> 
> HeHe :-)
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Weird how our cars develop personalities, or appear to,
> > > > > > based on how they respond to our travel related desires.
> > > > > > That being the most obvious example, I find that I
> > > > > > develop a two way relationship with every object I use.
> > > > >
> > > > > Very interesting. I know people who insists that cars have
> > > > > a delicate soul
> > > >
> > > > Yes indeed. Or what about boats. There's many a no-nonsense,
> > > > salty old sea dog who seems convinced of their vessel's self
> > > > and personality (sod the Turing test!).
> > > 
> > > And I've certainly known women who have far deeper and more meaningful
> > > relationships with their vibrators than they ever have -- or will ever
> > > have -- with a human being. Put *this* in your pipe and smoke it, Alan
> > > Turing:
> > > 
> > > Top TenReasons Why a Vibrator Is Better Than a Man
> > > 
> > > 1. It keeps going, and going, and going.
> > > A vibrator can keep going as long as it takes to satisfy you.  All it
> > > needs is a power supply, and batteries are a lot cheaper and easier to
> > > get than Viagra.   2. You don't have to worry where else it's
> > > been.
> > > Unless you picked it up at a yard sale, you won't have  to give a
> > > second thought to who else might have used your vibrator  before you.
> > > And you won't have to worry about your vibrator jumping in  another
> > > woman's pants when you're gone,unless if you have a freaky
> > > roommate.   3. Vibrators can have more than one speed.
> > > Most guys have two settings: full speed and off. Vibrators have variable
> > > controls and let you pick the pace and intensity. 4. A vibrator
> > > won't ask you if it's bigger than all other vibrators you've
> > > had.
> > > Vibrators aren't insecure about their size or ability,  and
> > > don't keep asking for reassurance. Big or small, they just get the 
> > > job done. 5. A vibrator doesn't roll over and snore.
> > > A vibrator won't finish before you and fall asleep.  When you're
> > > done with it, just shut it off and tuck it in your night  stand drawer,
> > > then get a peaceful night's rest with the bed to yourself. 6.
> > > It's ready when you are, and only when you are.
> > > With a flick of a switch, your vibrator is ready to  give you pleasure.
> > > On the other hand, when you're tired or have a  headache, you
> > > won't get in bed and find your vibrator turned on. 7.
> > > Vibrators are designed for your pleasure.
> > > A penis is designed for procreation and male   sexual pleasure, not to
> > > stimulate the clitoris and bring a woman to orgasm.   A vibrator, on the
> > > other hand, was created with women in mind. Use the right   tool for the
> > > job. 8. No germs and no sperm.
> > > A vibrator can't get you pregnant or give you an STD. You'll
> > > never have to worry about birth control, condoms, or safe sex.   If you
> > > like the feel of latex, slap a condom on for easy cleaning. 9.
> > > Vibrators don't expect you to swallow.
> > > You will never have to give your vibrator a blow job, much less swallow
> > > its cum or be made to feel guilty if you don't.10. Vibrators are
> > > easy to replace.
> > > If your vibrator breaks, wears out, or is defective,  it's easy
> > > enough to buy another one. Of course, a guy is easy to  replace, too,
> > > but you can't order one online and get home delivery.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[curtisdeltablues]

Too kind as usual Robin, but much appreciated.

I just came back from a showcase for a local school district and was once again 
amazed to see kids, so far from this period of music, totally rocking out to 
blues as if I were some sort of Justin Bieber mixed with some old guy in an 
acid reflux ad!  I had them chopping along to the rhythms to demonstrate how 
the ax song rhythms evolved into rock as I sped up the song up for the second 
verse, and they struggled to chop fast enough to keep up.  Blues is the sound 
of how humans feel.  Not the only one.  But one of the most predictably 
effective I have found. It hacks right through to the operating system, deep in 
the mammalian brain, where words are feelings, and rhythms express the joys and 
struggles of being human.  I could blab about blues so long I had to turn it 
into a job!

Thanks again for appreciating the music I love.




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> Dear Curtis,
> 
> When you write about the blues, I am immediately enthralled. I can't help 
> myself; it is my impression, therefore, that on this topic especially, you 
> tell 'the truth' in the most compelling why it could be told (first person 
> perspective). I am reminded of my first experience when you posted (answering 
> me) about the blues. I have never—in the happiest sense—ever recovered from 
> that—as I discover in reading this post of yours.
> 
> What you amount to (very subjectively construed by *my* first person 
> perspective of course) really gets expressed when you write about the blues. 
> This one post to Alex Stanley holds within itself (for those who can 
> apprehend this) the evidence of a human being who is living out his life in 
> the most real way that is possible. You are (as everyone on FFL knows) 
> impressive in *all* your posts; but when it comes to discussing the blues—and 
> your music—you have the last word. So true, so deep, so keenly felt.
> 
> I wish I could write a post which does justice to the gift I feel is given to 
> me when I read a post like this one.
> 
> Amazing. 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a 
> > > Lebanese guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no reason 
> > > why the right hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.
> > > 
> > > Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are two 
> > > different types of music that originated in the African-American 
> > > community, and it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. Yet, 
> > > when I hear white guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like they're 
> > > gangsta black guys from an urban ghetto, I cringe with embarrassment for 
> > > them. At least Eminem has some cred due to his Detroit upbringing, but 
> > > little white boy rappers who grew up in Fairfield Iowa just strike me as 
> > > completely ridiculous. 
> > 
> > 
> > I know what you mean.  I prefer white rappers who sound like white guys, 
> > like Kid Rock.  But I am an Emenem fan too so I figure that authenticity 
> > comes from a lot of different levels.  My favorite reaps comes from Jamaica 
> > or the Caribbean. I like Nicki Minaj's slightly softer lilting take on the 
> > form.   
> > 
> > > 
> > > I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically 
> > > born of the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the 
> > > passage of time that gives a musical style some distance from the unique 
> > > cultural situation that gave rise to it?
> > >
> > 
> > Blues was always party music.  It was the Pop music of the day.  Too much 
> > has been made of the connection between hardships and the blues IMO.  If 
> > you read about the actual lives of the musicians (Honeyboy Edwards "The 
> > World Don't Owe Me Nuthn'n) you see that these guys were expressing their 
> > experiences catting around.  Same themes that any other race's pop stars 
> > sing about, I'm great in bed, I love you baby so please take off your 
> > clothes, If you do I can last all night long, I think you would be better 
> > served by ditching the loser you are dating and coming with me, my GF 
> > treats me badly...
> > 
> > The greatness of their art was not that they expressed their time and place 
> > so well.  It was that they expressed the nuances of human relationships so 
> > well.  And in their era music was bifurcated into sanctified gospel music 
> > and the devil's music which included any songs about human relationship, 
> > sexy or not.
> > 
> > The only songs that I sing that are straight up sad are about death which 
> > some blues songs cover beautifully and is not race based.  
> > One Kind Favor, Blind Lemon Jefferson and Death Letter Blues are both 
> > masterful treatments about the human condition.  
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.

[FairfieldLife] Re: A little treat for Curtis

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" 
>  wrote:
> >> Back to business, and the subject of science and scientism.
> >> I wonder if you've read the enormously influential
> >> and fascinating "Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
> >> by Kuhn? And I wonder if Curtis has, and if not, whether
> >> he would think again about his faith in 'peer review' if
> >> he digested it?
> 
> > As I'll bet you are aware,it would be an improper 
> > interpretation of Kuhn's brilliant analysis to be an
> > indictment of value of the peer review process in science. 
> 
> There is a lot in your post that we can agree about (I've 
> snipped it for brevity).
> 
> Peer review is a part of what Kuhn called 'normal science' (as 
> opposed to revolutionary science). As you say, normal science 
> is essential for progress (though the big leaps come from the 
> revolutionary aspect). But the question I'd put to you is 
> this: Is it essential as a necessary evil, or essential 
> because it's a core value? It's difficult to read Kuhn without 
> accepting the former.

I can accept it as a necessary evil on one hand and and essential value on the 
other when we take into consideration how few scientists probably are purely 
one of the other.  In cases where orthodoxy institutionalized and perpetuated  
blocks innovation, it is more on the necessary evil side.  When it keeps 
journeymen scientists on point to flesh out theories with experimentation 
instead of going after every rabbit that runs, it demonstrates the essential 
good that this dynamic also allows.  Both cases can be made.

> 
> Perhaps the idea of representative democracy is analogous. We 
> want the core value of democracy. But we can't put every least 
> little issue and decision to the vote. As a practical solution 
> we elect representatives every so often - and they in turn 
> will elect the leaders and committeee members that are 
> required to create manageable, decision making groups (Your 
> Political System May Vary).
> 
> But just as it's the word democracy in the concept of 
> "representative democracy" that is fundamental, and that 
> expresses our ideal, so too it's the word "review" that counts 
> in the concept of "peer review".

With all the pros and cons of humans interacting this way.

> 
> I'm enough of a Popper fan to believe in the principle that 
> *THE* core, primary value of science is that ideas, beliefs, 
> theories (whatever) should be held up to criticism in complete 
> freedom. It's "the arguments and experiments that count, 
> stupid!" - not at all who makes those arguments, what club 
> they're in, what background they have, what dissolute private 
> practises they may indulge in etc. etc. (Note to Robin - you 
> notice the old-fashioned, even scholastic realism about 
> abtract entities there, as opposed to the nominalism and 
> subjectivism that comes naturally to the modern mind? It was 
> Popper after all who wrote a paper "Epistemology Without A 
> Knowing Subject" ;-) )

I understand the ideal and the value of keeping an eye on it above the scrum of 
what actually goes on as science done by flawed humans.

> 
> "Peer review" is a quite transparent compromise of this ideal. 
> (Knowledge "by authority").>

I still believe that the Wild West level of challenge freedom is built on the 
shoulders of previous work that does discover some stuff about how life works 
that we can count on.  The basic formulation of evolutionary thoery is that for 
me.  The details should be the scrum it is between competing views of how it 
works.  But it is not knowledge by authority in a religious sense because the 
theories themselves are tested to reach the level of confidence we have in 
them.  This doesn't diminish the cautionary tale you are pointing out.  I was 
thinking of the poor guy who cured ulcers when he found out it was bacteria 
based.  What a rash of shit he had to endure from the orthodoxy!  But then he 
wasn't challenging that the stomach is the seat of digestion.  He built on that 
basic understanding.

> 
> So how does this fit in with Behe & your discssion with Robin? 
> I'm thinking of this kind of thing of yours:
> 
> "But in this discussion we were talking about the assertions of
> Behe in context with the biological sciences, and it is just a 
> fact that he has not made his case to his peers. That isn't on 
> me, it is on him"
> 
> This is where I think you are invoking 'normal science' to do 
> something it just can't do.>

Fascinating challenge.

> 
> Let's distinguish two cases for a discussion of a theory 'P':
> 
> 1) A discussion of the scientific, philosophical, or religious 
> merits of P. I would put it to you that 'peer review', or the 
> fact that most scientists agree/disagree with P says NOTHING 
> whatsoever about the truth of P. The ONLY thing that reflects 
> on the truth of

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yogic Flying
> > > 
> > > > That fact that so many Westerners believe that it might
> > > > happen to them someday is an amazing demonstration of
> > > > the laws of consistency and commitment that seem to
> > > > govern how we form and protect beliefs with no evidence.
> > > > (Reference Cialdini's book "Influence")
> > > 
> > > How many Westerners would that be, Curtis?
> > 
> > Somewhere between the number of people who were all in at
> > the beginning of the program (very high percentage) and a
> > total shift to a  movement-wide complete disbelief in
> > Maharishi's direct promises concerning physical flight.
> > Since we have some people who believe they already have,
> > this number will never be zero.
> 
> No no no, don't sidestep. You were actually according
> validity to social "laws" based on the "fact" that "so
> many" Westerners believe they might fly. That ain't
> very scientific.>

Nor was it proposed that way.  I gave the source for the thoery and applied it 
using his terminology.  I believe the fact that educated people in the West 
believe that they will someday fly by thinking certain thoughts amazing.  I 
gave my explanation why and the source.  Make your own judgement.  But when I 
was in the movement I lived with hundreds of people who believed it, myself 
included.  We were not all idiots.  I believe we were demonstrating a principle 
written about in the book I mentioned.  He gives his own experimental basis for 
why he believes it.  My example has nothing to do with its validity or lack.

> 
> The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
> Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
> say "TMer Westerners"?

This is where your attempt to find something wrong kind of betrays you.  Yes 
Judy, I believe that anyone here might know that I was speaking about the only 
group I know of that sells techniques of yogic flying and which we were both 
trained in, and which is the focus of this group.  And when I sat in a room at 
the 7,000 course it felt like a lot.  I don't know how many have rejected it as 
nonsense since but there are still people jumping through hoops to get into the 
domes and some of them do. 

 And even so, would that really
> be an "amazing" demonstration of a social "law" that
> presumably applies to everyone?>

There are reasons it doesn't apply to everyone in the group in the same way.  
One big factor would be in the amount of consistency and commitment in play.  
But yes, according to Cialdini, this is a universal tendency which is exploited 
in some groups and some marketing methods.

For me it gives a fascinating account of why so few (and there were some) 
decided that this claim of Maharishi's went too far after years of TM.  He was 
quite unequivocal in the beginning about physical flight Yet so many people 
didn't cry bullshit.  Many of those people still practice today because of how 
it makes them feel and have given up the idea that they will ever fly 
physically.  This group is also demonstrating the same principle.  But there 
are some, and neither of us know how many who still carry the hope that they 
will fly someday.  Again, I believe this principle is useful to understand it.  
YMMV, read the book.

 Further, I would
> question whether there even is such a thing as a social
> "law." I think a better term would be "tendency."

I was using his terms.  I hope you bring it up to him sometime.

> 
> Bottom line, you way overstated your case.
>

Bottom line, you made something out of nothing.  And if you don't believe that 
this fact of believing in human unassisted flight by a group of any size of 
Westerners doesn't represent something notable that begs for an explanation, I 
do. I gave my explanation and the source if anyone wants to challenge it for 
real.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Protection from black magic/Tantra

[obbajeeba]

Is there one I can buy to protect from the Alliance?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> Vag forgot to add that you can be "protected" from tantra
> and even at a $200 discount!
> 
> Yagya for Prevention from black magic /Tantra
>  on-black-magic-tantra>Let's take certain measures
> and protections by way of rituals and pooja prevent you from black
> magic.
> Category:
> 'A' category, 5 days, 7 pundits: 551 USD 'B' category, 3 days, 5
> pundits: 451 USD 'C' category, 2 days, 5 pundits: 351 USD
> 
> Guess this means my Vajrakila and Yamaantaka puja-s
> won't work anymore.
> 
> How about Yagya for Defeating the Enemies?
>  g-enemies> : A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is
> taken away with the help of this yagya.
> 
> Let's see, taken away ...by the Yamaduta-s?
> 
> 
> Sorta like Mafia mechanics when they give you a "ride".
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > >
> > >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of
> > > negativity yagya or two or three.
> >
> > I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to
> > believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds
> > of rituals.
> >
> >
> > http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya-
> > defeating-enemies
> >
> > Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> > YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> > A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away
> > with the help of this yagya.
> >
> > Category:
> > 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> > 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Bad TV, and how the TMO should market TM

[Bhairitu]

On 09/21/2011 05:59 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> The last week or so has been Viewer Hell for this cinema addict. I've
> had to wade through a number of TV pilots that I would never have spent
> a moment on if a potential client hadn't asked me to review them. It was
> a dismaying experience, but I think I learned something from it about
> how the TMO should pitch its one salable product -- basic TM.
>
> I actually looked forward to watching the first two episodes of
> "Ringer," because it stars Sarah Jessica Parker, who I loved in "Buffy."
> It had potential, in that it was actually SJP squared, playing twins.
> Sadly, it had an unimaginative plot, and was full of unhappy, unlikable,
> self-obsessed characters who between the lot of them couldn't come up
> with a thimbleful of positive self esteem if their lives (and their
> ratings) depended on it. As a TV writer, you should know you're in
> trouble when the only admirable character in your show is a former
> addict who now works as a NA counselor. Just sayin'.
>
> Then I watched "2 Broke Girls," memorable only for Kat Dennings'
> delivery of the punchlines of a series of low-rent sexual innuendo
> jokes. Again, it's a show that is all *about* lack of self-esteem...look
> at the title. Next came "New Girl," starring Zooey Deschanel, which was
> the sole redeeming hour of the whole viewing experiment. Zooey is truly
> adorable, and this show puts her in the spotlight, pretty much carrying
> the whole series herself IMO, because I couldn't work up a bit of
> empathy for any of the other characters or actors. Fortunately, I think
> Zooey's up to the challenge, and this one may be a big hit.
>
> But, at the same time, Zooey's character is lack of self esteem
> incarnate. This poor self image is reflected back to her by her three
> male roommates (who have a "Douchebag Jar" into which they have to
> deposit money whenever they act like douchebags...and the jar is usually
> full), her model friend, or any of the guys and gals they ineffectively
> hit on while looking for love in all of the wrong places. Zooey's
> character, ferchrissakes, still wallowing in an embarrassing breakup,
> watches "Dirty Dancing" five or six times a day, sobbing through it. And
> millions of viewers are going to tune in every week *to* watch her
> wallow, because they do the same thing, and can identify with her and
> her big, sad blue eyes.
>
> So, what's my "takeaway" from seeing these TV shows? And how on earth do
> I relate it to the TMO and how it should be marketing TM?
>
> It's the common denominator -- lack of self esteem. If these are all
> going to be popular TV series in America (and they probably all will),
> watched weekly by millions of viewers, what are those viewers seeing
> onscreen and identifying with that makes them want to come back week
> after week for more? Lack of self esteem. Viewers can identify with
> these characters because they feel that same lack themselves.
>
> So I'm thinkin'...how could the TMO better market TM, if what they
> *really* wanted to do was promote its practice, and get the most people
> started with it? Duh. Pitch it as a way to feel better about yourself.
> Instead of pitching it (via the DLF, pretty much the only teaching
> effort being undertaken at this time) to at-risk kids, people in
> prisons, and soldiers suffering from PTSD, get back to pitching it to
> the Common Man. And as much as the groups of people mentioned above need
> something that can boost their self esteem, after this week of watching
> the TV shows they watch, I'm thinkin' that the Common Man can use a bit
> of a boost themselves, and might be convinced to pay a reasonable price
> for it.
>
> Forget the flying crap; only dweebs want to learn to fly. Forget the ME
> stuff; nobody believes it anyway. Get back to the SIMS days, stop
> relying for your income on "milking the faithful," and start marketing
> to new people, pitching something that is of actual interest to them.
> Since the TMO will still feel that it has to do research to sell its
> product, by all means do it. But do research on normal, everyday,
> working people, and limit it to self-surveys of their general feelings
> of self esteem and self worth before starting TM and then after a few
> months of regular practice. I suspect you could come up with some real,
> non-data-massaged results from such studies that would show that TM has
> a real benefit in this area.
>
> Then go out and pitch *that* as a reason for learning TM. Lower the
> price at the same time to make it more reasonable for your target
> audience, and limit what you teach people to the basic mechanics of TM.
> Don't try to "cross sell" the Sidhis or enlightenment; mention them once
> during the basic course, and then don't bring them up again unless
> someone actually *asks* about them. In other words, focus on your one
> salable product, and pitch it at the thing that millions of Americans
> are actually interested in -- self esteem and ho

[FairfieldLife] Two more quick mini-reviews

[turquoiseb]

Very "mini," because both of these films fall into the
"I was paid to watch these films and want to return the
money so that I can get these four hours of my life back"
category. Both suffer from the same indignity -- using a 
known actor hired to spend less than a day on-set filming 
his performance to help sell a worthless piece of trash
by including his name in the credits. 

The first instance of this was Bruce Willis, in a horrible,
horrible, horrible film called "Setup." It seems to have 
been conceived as a vehicle for rapper 50 Cent, whose per-
formance wasn't worth even a quarter. Willis sleepwalked
through a bit part as a mob boss. The script was written
by people who have clearly destroyed most of their brain
cells smoking crack, and have no concept of either logic
or entertainment. If someone offers to pay you to see 
this movie, turn them down. I wish I had, and I actually
like Bruce Willis.

Next on the agenda was the Dutch-made "Amsterdam Heavy,"
which used B-movie veteran Michael Madsen the same way
that "Setup" used Bruce Willis. Madsen's part consists
of about 2-3 minutes total screen time, with his character
blathering away incoherently while firing up a big joint
in an Amsterdam coffeehouse. My bet is that it was a 
real joint, and that he needed it to get through having
to be in this piece of shit movie. The real "star" of 
this film is a nobody named Rik Sinkeldam. Suffice it to 
say that his acting is better than his skill at martial 
arts. This is not the compliment it may sound like. This 
film contains by far the worst-choreographed martial arts 
scenes in movie history; it could serve as a training 
film for how *not* to do martial arts. Avoid like the
plague.

[FairfieldLife] I DID IT!

[Mike Dixon]

I have always worked hard for what I wanted I had nowhere to turn this 
caught my eye so I just ran with it.http://metconetworks.org/NeilDoyle39.html";>http://metconetworks.org/NeilDoyle39.html
 miracles really do exist trust me on this 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[Bhairitu]

On 09/20/2011 08:40 PM, seekliberation wrote:
>> The top tax rate for millionaires was put into effect by Herbert Hoover,
>> a Republican.  FDR kept it, so did Truman, so did Eisenhower and so did
>> Kennedy.  Johnson reduced it down to around 76% but took away a lot of
>> loopholes.
> I agree with you, for the most part.  Perhaps if someone employs a 
> significant amount of people, I can see some logic behind tax breaks.  
> However, when I say 'significant', I don't mean a maid and a lawn care team.  
> I mean companies like Walmart or McDonalds.  But otherwise, I don't see much 
> of a reason that millionaires&  higher need tax breaks.especially in 
> terms of hollywood and other 'singular' type talented people who become so 
> wealthy through their own efforts, but don't necessarily branch out towards 
> employing mass groups of working class people.

People who employ a significant amount of people run businesses and 
under those rules get deductions.  What we're talking about is literally 
"take home pay" that is very high.

>
>> People with gross amounts of money aren't very spiritual.  They are
>> materialists far removed from the mindset of most of the folks on FFL
> Compared to most of us on FFL, that might be somewhat true.  But compared to 
> many other common people walking the streets with little or no money, they 
> are not necessarily more or less spiritual.  'Spirituality' in its essence 
> could be defined in many ways, and one way is 'a separation of the conscious 
> mind from the field of activity'.  It is possible to be wealthy and 
> experience this separation at the same time.  I've lived among very poor, 
> lower class people, middle class people, and higher/upper class people, to 
> include observing them in about 40 different countries.  I, personally, don't 
> see a separation of conscious mind from activity to occur more often among 
> any specific class of people.  At least that's my opinion.  Many middle and 
> lower class people i've met are very obsessed with materialism, they just 
> don't have the capacity to satisfy their impulses either due to lack of 
> effort, initiative, ingenuity, or discipline, etc

The active word was "gross".  You have people who have accumulated 
wealth serendipitously.  These days we call those people "accidental 
millionaires."  Bill Gates was that way, it just happened to him because 
he was in the right place, at the right time, with the right idea.  Had 
Gary Kildall not been having fun flying his private plane instead of 
making his meeting with IBM no one today would probably know the name 
Bill Gates.

I've known upper class people who were spiritual. What I'm talking about 
are "money addicts".  People who think the object of life is to make as 
much money as you can.  Certainly having wealth insures freedom but you 
don't need absurd amounts to achieve that.  When I was looking around at 
sites discussing these tax rates one blog decried how these rates 
disincentivized making money.  The comments followed the same theme.  I 
could have pissed them off by telling posting a comment saying "the 
purpose of life is not making money."  We don't want people like that 
influencing policy for the rest of us.  Bottom line is the uber rich are 
outnumbered 99 to 1 so we should be able to outvote them.

Last year in Washington state Bill Gates Sr. headed a campaign to pass 
an initiative for higher tax rates on the rich.  It failed mainly due to 
idiots who probably believe they might just win the lottery next week 
and don't want to pay higher taxes.  We have people on FFL about taxes 
taking "other people's money" and yet don't seem to have a problem with 
taking "other people's countries."  See the hypocrisy?

>
>
>> except for maybe those few tea baggers who believe they're going to win
>> the lottery next week or that the Koch brothers will rain golden showers
>> down on them.
> I think you are on to something here, but it is more often than you indicate. 
>  Yes, there are lower and middle class who are obsessed with winning 
> lotteries or recieving other hand-outs.  However, from my observation, lower 
> and middle class are no less obsessed with materialism in general (Many 
> TM'ers excluded).  If I hang out with a common working class person or family 
> and sit down at the dinner table with them, I rarely, if ever, hear any depth 
> of conversation about spirituality or anything deep in nature.  If I observe 
> how they act, behave and carry themselves in life, I see a complete 
> 'identification with the body, mind, and world they live in', as opposed to a 
> spiritual life of not 'identifying' with anything.  Just because their 
> ability to plan out their finances and employment, their work ethic, and 
> their servitude is weak, doesn't necessarily mean their spiritual life is 
> strong.

The Koch brothers earned their wealth the old fashioned way: they 
inherited it.

We would hope most people are more realistic and know 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama a machine avatar in his next incarnation?

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Is that your excuse for not having a girlfriend?:-)

HeHe :-)


> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Weird how our cars develop personalities, or appear to,
> > > > > based on how they respond to our travel related desires.
> > > > > That being the most obvious example, I find that I
> > > > > develop a two way relationship with every object I use.
> > > >
> > > > Very interesting. I know people who insists that cars have
> > > > a delicate soul
> > >
> > > Yes indeed. Or what about boats. There's many a no-nonsense,
> > > salty old sea dog who seems convinced of their vessel's self
> > > and personality (sod the Turing test!).
> > 
> > And I've certainly known women who have far deeper and more meaningful
> > relationships with their vibrators than they ever have -- or will ever
> > have -- with a human being. Put *this* in your pipe and smoke it, Alan
> > Turing:
> > 
> > Top TenReasons Why a Vibrator Is Better Than a Man
> > 
> > 1. It keeps going, and going, and going.
> > A vibrator can keep going as long as it takes to satisfy you.  All it
> > needs is a power supply, and batteries are a lot cheaper and easier to
> > get than Viagra.   2. You don't have to worry where else it's
> > been.
> > Unless you picked it up at a yard sale, you won't have  to give a
> > second thought to who else might have used your vibrator  before you.
> > And you won't have to worry about your vibrator jumping in  another
> > woman's pants when you're gone,unless if you have a freaky
> > roommate.   3. Vibrators can have more than one speed.
> > Most guys have two settings: full speed and off. Vibrators have variable
> > controls and let you pick the pace and intensity. 4. A vibrator
> > won't ask you if it's bigger than all other vibrators you've
> > had.
> > Vibrators aren't insecure about their size or ability,  and
> > don't keep asking for reassurance. Big or small, they just get the 
> > job done. 5. A vibrator doesn't roll over and snore.
> > A vibrator won't finish before you and fall asleep.  When you're
> > done with it, just shut it off and tuck it in your night  stand drawer,
> > then get a peaceful night's rest with the bed to yourself. 6.
> > It's ready when you are, and only when you are.
> > With a flick of a switch, your vibrator is ready to  give you pleasure.
> > On the other hand, when you're tired or have a  headache, you
> > won't get in bed and find your vibrator turned on. 7.
> > Vibrators are designed for your pleasure.
> > A penis is designed for procreation and male   sexual pleasure, not to
> > stimulate the clitoris and bring a woman to orgasm.   A vibrator, on the
> > other hand, was created with women in mind. Use the right   tool for the
> > job. 8. No germs and no sperm.
> > A vibrator can't get you pregnant or give you an STD. You'll
> > never have to worry about birth control, condoms, or safe sex.   If you
> > like the feel of latex, slap a condom on for easy cleaning. 9.
> > Vibrators don't expect you to swallow.
> > You will never have to give your vibrator a blow job, much less swallow
> > its cum or be made to feel guilty if you don't.10. Vibrators are
> > easy to replace.
> > If your vibrator breaks, wears out, or is defective,  it's easy
> > enough to buy another one. Of course, a guy is easy to  replace, too,
> > but you can't order one online and get home delivery.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

"Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
negativity yagya or two or three... I wonder if this is considered black magic? 
I'd find it hard to believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing 
these kinds of rituals."

Vaj, I have it on unimpeachable authority that no black magic is practiced by 
the Vedic pundits of FF. They want to, but the inordinate amount of time 
already devoted to human sacrifices makes it impractical. By the way, which 
sutra have you been repeating to transform you into a jackass? :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
> 
> > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> >
> >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
> > negativity yagya or two or three.
> 
> I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to  
> believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds  
> of rituals.
> 
> 
> http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya- 
> defeating-enemies
> 
> Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away  
> with the help of this yagya.
> 
> Category:
> 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
>

[FairfieldLife] Protection from black magic/Tantra

[emptybill]

Vag forgot to add that you can be "protected" from tantra
and even at a $200 discount!

Yagya for Prevention from black magic /Tantra
Let's take certain measures
and protections by way of rituals and pooja prevent you from black
magic.
Category:
'A' category, 5 days, 7 pundits: 551 USD 'B' category, 3 days, 5
pundits: 451 USD 'C' category, 2 days, 5 pundits: 351 USD

Guess this means my Vajrakila and Yamaantaka puja-s
won't work anymore.

How about Yagya for Defeating the Enemies?
 : A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is
taken away with the help of this yagya.

Let's see, taken away ...by the Yamaduta-s?


Sorta like Mafia mechanics when they give you a "ride".



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> >
> >> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of
> > negativity yagya or two or three.
>
> I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to
> believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds
> of rituals.
>
>
> http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya-
> defeating-enemies
>
> Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
> YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
> A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away
> with the help of this yagya.
>
> Category:
> 'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
> 'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A little treat for Curtis

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
 wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" 
 wrote:
>> Back to business, and the subject of science and scientism.
>> I wonder if you've read the enormously influential
>> and fascinating "Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
>> by Kuhn? And I wonder if Curtis has, and if not, whether
>> he would think again about his faith in 'peer review' if
>> he digested it?

> As I'll bet you are aware,it would be an improper 
> interpretation of Kuhn's brilliant analysis to be an
> indictment of value of the peer review process in science. 

There is a lot in your post that we can agree about (I've 
snipped it for brevity).

Peer review is a part of what Kuhn called 'normal science' (as 
opposed to revolutionary science). As you say, normal science 
is essential for progress (though the big leaps come from the 
revolutionary aspect). But the question I'd put to you is 
this: Is it essential as a necessary evil, or essential 
because it's a core value? It's difficult to read Kuhn without 
accepting the former.

Perhaps the idea of representative democracy is analogous. We 
want the core value of democracy. But we can't put every least 
little issue and decision to the vote. As a practical solution 
we elect representatives every so often - and they in turn 
will elect the leaders and committeee members that are 
required to create manageable, decision making groups (Your 
Political System May Vary).

But just as it's the word democracy in the concept of 
"representative democracy" that is fundamental, and that 
expresses our ideal, so too it's the word "review" that counts 
in the concept of "peer review".

I'm enough of a Popper fan to believe in the principle that 
*THE* core, primary value of science is that ideas, beliefs, 
theories (whatever) should be held up to criticism in complete 
freedom. It's "the arguments and experiments that count, 
stupid!" - not at all who makes those arguments, what club 
they're in, what background they have, what dissolute private 
practises they may indulge in etc. etc. (Note to Robin - you 
notice the old-fashioned, even scholastic realism about 
abtract entities there, as opposed to the nominalism and 
subjectivism that comes naturally to the modern mind? It was 
Popper after all who wrote a paper "Epistemology Without A 
Knowing Subject" ;-) )

"Peer review" is a quite transparent compromise of this ideal. 
(Knowledge "by authority").

So how does this fit in with Behe & your discssion with Robin? 
I'm thinking of this kind of thing of yours:

"But in this discussion we were talking about the assertions of
Behe in context with the biological sciences, and it is just a 
fact that he has not made his case to his peers. That isn't on 
me, it is on him"

This is where I think you are invoking 'normal science' to do 
something it just can't do.

Let's distinguish two cases for a discussion of a theory 'P':

1) A discussion of the scientific, philosophical, or religious 
merits of P. I would put it to you that 'peer review', or the 
fact that most scientists agree/disagree with P says NOTHING 
whatsoever about the truth of P. The ONLY thing that reflects 
on the truth of P is the logic and evidence for P. 

2) A discussion in which people who are not up to speed with 
the evidence for P (people who cannot review that evidence, or 
people who are unwilling to review that evidence) nevertheless 
have to make important decisions that depend on the truth or 
falsity of P. In this case it seems to me to be entirely 
rational to go with some such as "90% of scientists in the 
field believe in P, so therfore we'll go with P".

What I'm saying then is that against Robin and Behe, you were 
going with (2), when the context of the discussion dictated 
that you should have been focused on (1).

On the other hand, if you had been discussing as, say school 
governors (do you have such things?), "what should be taught 
in our school curriculum?", then I'd say (2) would have been 
completely to the point.

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[maskedzebra]

Dear Curtis,

When you write about the blues, I am immediately enthralled. I can't help 
myself; it is my impression, therefore, that on this topic especially, you tell 
'the truth' in the most compelling why it could be told (first person 
perspective). I am reminded of my first experience when you posted (answering 
me) about the blues. I have never—in the happiest sense—ever recovered from 
that—as I discover in reading this post of yours.

What you amount to (very subjectively construed by *my* first person 
perspective of course) really gets expressed when you write about the blues. 
This one post to Alex Stanley holds within itself (for those who can apprehend 
this) the evidence of a human being who is living out his life in the most real 
way that is possible. You are (as everyone on FFL knows) impressive in *all* 
your posts; but when it comes to discussing the blues—and your music—you have 
the last word. So true, so deep, so keenly felt.

I wish I could write a post which does justice to the gift I feel is given to 
me when I read a post like this one.

Amazing. 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> wrote:
> 
> > With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a 
> > Lebanese guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no reason 
> > why the right hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.
> > 
> > Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are two 
> > different types of music that originated in the African-American community, 
> > and it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. Yet, when I hear 
> > white guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like they're gangsta black 
> > guys from an urban ghetto, I cringe with embarrassment for them. At least 
> > Eminem has some cred due to his Detroit upbringing, but little white boy 
> > rappers who grew up in Fairfield Iowa just strike me as completely 
> > ridiculous. 
> 
> 
> I know what you mean.  I prefer white rappers who sound like white guys, like 
> Kid Rock.  But I am an Emenem fan too so I figure that authenticity comes 
> from a lot of different levels.  My favorite reaps comes from Jamaica or the 
> Caribbean. I like Nicki Minaj's slightly softer lilting take on the form.   
> 
> > 
> > I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically born 
> > of the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the passage 
> > of time that gives a musical style some distance from the unique cultural 
> > situation that gave rise to it?
> >
> 
> Blues was always party music.  It was the Pop music of the day.  Too much has 
> been made of the connection between hardships and the blues IMO.  If you read 
> about the actual lives of the musicians (Honeyboy Edwards "The World Don't 
> Owe Me Nuthn'n) you see that these guys were expressing their experiences 
> catting around.  Same themes that any other race's pop stars sing about, I'm 
> great in bed, I love you baby so please take off your clothes, If you do I 
> can last all night long, I think you would be better served by ditching the 
> loser you are dating and coming with me, my GF treats me badly...
> 
> The greatness of their art was not that they expressed their time and place 
> so well.  It was that they expressed the nuances of human relationships so 
> well.  And in their era music was bifurcated into sanctified gospel music and 
> the devil's music which included any songs about human relationship, sexy or 
> not.
> 
> The only songs that I sing that are straight up sad are about death which 
> some blues songs cover beautifully and is not race based.  
> One Kind Favor, Blind Lemon Jefferson and Death Letter Blues are both 
> masterful treatments about the human condition.  
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdgrQoZHnNY
> 
> The only anachronistic elements are the death letter itself, which was a 
> black trimmed letter used to inform people about a death.  The other is the 
> "cool'n board" which was a board put on chairs to keep the body until the 
> friends could gather for burial.  
> 
> As a performance note, I sing blues as myself, I never sing in schtick, 
> trying to sound like a black guy.  But I usually use the idioms in the songs 
> accurately unless it is something I can't relate to personally.  What makes 
> it blues for me is the direct expression of my personal feelings.  What makes 
> it preservation work is that I am expressing myself though their words.  And 
> even though I never put a chick on a train and saw the lights on the back as 
> she left me, I have put a few in cars, so I can congruently get behind the 
> lyrics.
> 
> "When the train left the station, there were two lights on behind.
> The blue light was my blues (sad) and the red light was my mind. (pissed!) "
> 
> When I write in the the blues style I use modern language with occasional 
> nods to specialized words l

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pay It Forward

[John]

I like her.  Let's hope she wins in Massachusetts.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Elizabeth Warren, former Special Advisor for the United States Consumer 
> Financial Protection Bureau; currently Democratic candidate for Senate in 
> Massachusetts, on a recent "Talking Tour":
> 
> 
> I hear all this, you know, "Well, this is class warfare, this is 
> whatever."—No!
> 
> There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.
> 
> You built a factory out there—good for you! But I want to be clear. 
> 
> You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for.
> 
> You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.
> 
> You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that 
> the rest of us paid for.
> 
> You didn't have to worry that maurauding bands would come and seize 
> everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because 
> of the work the rest of us did. 
> 
> Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a 
> great idea—God bless. Keep a big hunk of it.
> 
> But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay 
> forward for the next kid who comes along.
> 
> 
> http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/i_got_your_class_warfare_right_here/
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/3zsv227
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[Denise Evans]

Ya see how I transposed the word "searched" with "googled?"  Whoops. 

On another topic, I was in a Microsoft store the other month, and the guy 
helping me was a bit affronted when I automatically just went to "google", not 
recognizing "bing."  Are they all the same?



From: Denise Evans 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street


  
Years ago, as a teenager, I subscribed to Mother Jones.  I hid it from my 
family, as the line from my family was "Denise, we come from a long line of 
Republicans."  They sent me right-wing extremist newsletters, books, articles 
for years.

Last night, I got the panic call from my daughter in college who is taking a 
Mass Communications class and put off her first paper until 5 hours before the 
deadline.  The paper was on Leslie Moonvez, the CEO of CBS Corporation.  So, in 
attempting to help her and get her perspective with substance, I went to Slate 
and googled CBS.  Lo and behold (or is it "low and behold" - tee hee), there 
was a well-written article that provided some good background information for 
her.  Another little gift from  FFL :)

Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living! - Mother Jones

My father's wife last year was all up in arms last April about the "double 
taxation" issue, which is one "reason" being batted around for the rich 
shouldn't have to pay any more taxesthis article puts some of that in 
perspective, but I'm interested in that topic.

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/08/17/the-dual-taxation-meme/  



From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:43 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street


  
Kevin Drum of Mother Jones makes another good point in a blog post:
"...Obama's point isn't that millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck 
drivers. It's that some millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck drivers — 
and as a simple matter of fairness and equity they shouldn't. Take a look at 
the table below, extracted from the Tax Policy Center. It doesn't just show the 
tax rates of mere millionaires, it shows the tax rates of the top 400 
super-duper millionaires. Back in 1992, only 33 of them paid less than 20% of 
their income in federal taxes. Today, 289 of them do. That's just not right.
"On Fox News, they brush this off with a yawn. 'It's because most of their 
income comes from capital gains,' they repeat tirelessly, as if that was 
sufficient explanation all by itself. But why? Surely even trust fund babies 
ought to pay some kind of minimum tax rate no matter where their income comes 
from. Is a 20% tax floor on the income of the rich really so outrageous?"
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/lies-damn-lies-and-average-tax-rates

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans  wrote:
>
> I read the whole thing, actually.  It's a good read in that it is quite 
> accessible to the masses.
> 
> 
> 
> From: authfriend jstein@...
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:28 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@ wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Judy for forwarding the whole article and encouraging
> > reader integrity on what the article really said.
> 
> My pleasure, but that was just one piece of the article.
> The whole thing is worth reading; quite a bit of good
> info. It *isn't* all that simple, which makes it easier
> to twist. It's
 important to know the ins and outs.
> 
> > 
> > And, thank you Nabby? for sending the link to the Wall Street protest. 
> >  Loved seeing it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: authfriend jstein@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:07 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardwillytexwilliams"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Bhairitu:
> > > > And millionaires are whining today about Obama's 
> > > > plan to tax the rich more. 
> > > > 
> > > And, anyone that can add is laughing at Obama's plan 
> > > to 'tax the rich'! 
> > > 
> >
 > "In terms of averages, the current tax system already 
> > > satisfies the Buffett Rule. Americans on average pay 
> > > 16% of their total income in federal income and payroll 
> > > taxes, while millionaires pay an average of 20.1%, 
> > > according to the Tax Policy Center..."
> > 
> > Here's the rest of that section, which Willytex carefully
> > left out:
> > 
> > "But averages mask the Buffett phenomenon. (See why some
> > millionaires end up owing no tax at all)
> > 
> > "For most people, wages make up a majority of their income,
> > so when they ge

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[Denise Evans]

Years ago, as a teenager, I subscribed to Mother Jones.  I hid it from my 
family, as the line from my family was "Denise, we come from a long line of 
Republicans."  They sent me right-wing extremist newsletters, books, articles 
for years.

Last night, I got the panic call from my daughter in college who is taking a 
Mass Communications class and put off her first paper until 5 hours before the 
deadline.  The paper was on Leslie Moonvez, the CEO of CBS Corporation.  So, in 
attempting to help her and get her perspective with substance, I went to Slate 
and googled CBS.  Lo and behold (or is it "low and behold" - tee hee), there 
was a well-written article that provided some good background information for 
her.  Another little gift from  FFL :)

Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living! - Mother Jones

My father's wife last year was all up in arms last April about the "double 
taxation" issue, which is one "reason" being batted around for the rich 
shouldn't have to pay any more taxesthis article puts some of that in 
perspective, but I'm interested in that topic.

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/08/17/the-dual-taxation-meme/  



From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:43 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street


  
Kevin Drum of Mother Jones makes another good point in a blog post:
"...Obama's point isn't that millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck 
drivers. It's that some millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck drivers — 
and as a simple matter of fairness and equity they shouldn't. Take a look at 
the table below, extracted from the Tax Policy Center. It doesn't just show the 
tax rates of mere millionaires, it shows the tax rates of the top 400 
super-duper millionaires. Back in 1992, only 33 of them paid less than 20% of 
their income in federal taxes. Today, 289 of them do. That's just not right.
"On Fox News, they brush this off with a yawn. 'It's because most of their 
income comes from capital gains,' they repeat tirelessly, as if that was 
sufficient explanation all by itself. But why? Surely even trust fund babies 
ought to pay some kind of minimum tax rate no matter where their income comes 
from. Is a 20% tax floor on the income of the rich really so outrageous?"
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/lies-damn-lies-and-average-tax-rates

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans  wrote:
>
> I read the whole thing, actually.  It's a good read in that it is quite 
> accessible to the masses.
> 
> 
> 
> From: authfriend jstein@...
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:28 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@ wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Judy for forwarding the whole article and encouraging
> > reader integrity on what the article really said.
> 
> My pleasure, but that was just one piece of the article.
> The whole thing is worth reading; quite a bit of good
> info. It *isn't* all that simple, which makes it easier
> to twist. It's important to know the ins and outs.
> 
> > 
> > And, thank you Nabby? for sending the link to the Wall Street protest. 
> >  Loved seeing it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: authfriend jstein@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:07 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardwillytexwilliams"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Bhairitu:
> > > > And millionaires are whining today about Obama's 
> > > > plan to tax the rich more. 
> > > > 
> > > And, anyone that can add is laughing at Obama's plan 
> > > to 'tax the rich'! 
> > > 
> > > "In terms of averages, the current tax system already 
> > > satisfies the Buffett Rule. Americans on average pay 
> > > 16% of their total income in federal income and payroll 
> > > taxes, while millionaires pay an average of 20.1%, 
> > > according to the Tax Policy Center..."
> > 
> > Here's the rest of that section, which Willytex carefully
> > left out:
> > 
> > "But averages mask the Buffett phenomenon. (See why some
> > millionaires end up owing no tax at all)
> > 
> > "For most people, wages make up a majority of their income,
> > so when they get a raise their average tax rate may go up,
> > said Diane Lim Rogers, chief economist at the Concord
> > Coalition, a deficit watchdog group. 
> > 
> > "But millionaires typically have several sources of income --
> > some taxed at lower rates than others, if at all. So it's
> > entirely possible that their effective tax rate can fall as
> > their income goes up if they start to get less money from
> > wages and more from, say, tax-preferred or tax-free
> > investments."
> > 
> > > 

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[obbajeeba]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> wrote:
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:11 PM
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re:
> > > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't
> > > > they?
> > > 
> > > I don't know whether they do so in an official, organized way,
> > > but they're well-aware of it. Sometimes something will be posted
> > > here that may have implications for some project the movement has
> > > in the works, and I'll get feedback within the hour from someone
> > > in the movement asking to take a post down, set the record
> > > straight, etc.
> > > 
> > 
> > My brother is aware of FFL. He wasn't terribly impressed.>
> 
> Perhaps he might see us in a more favorable light if we all agreed to wear 
> party hats? I've been wanting to try this new Burger King monstrosity anyway, 
> so let me know if anyone needs me to pick them up something to wear that 
> would be Raja-worthy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
>
I want one, please!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al1GZyS-dRw

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > > > > Yogic Flying
> > 
> > > That fact that so many Westerners believe that it might
> > > happen to them someday is an amazing demonstration of
> > > the laws of consistency and commitment that seem to
> > > govern how we form and protect beliefs with no evidence.
> > > (Reference Cialdini's book "Influence")
> > 
> > How many Westerners would that be, Curtis?
> 
> Somewhere between the number of people who were all in at
> the beginning of the program (very high percentage) and a
> total shift to a  movement-wide complete disbelief in
> Maharishi's direct promises concerning physical flight.
> Since we have some people who believe they already have,
> this number will never be zero.

No no no, don't sidestep. You were actually according
validity to social "laws" based on the "fact" that "so
many" Westerners believe they might fly. That ain't
very scientific.

The point is that this is a *tiny, tiny* percentage of
Westerners, even at the beginning. Maybe you meant to
say "TMer Westerners"? And even so, would that really
be an "amazing" demonstration of a social "law" that
presumably applies to everyone? Further, I would
question whether there even is such a thing as a social
"law." I think a better term would be "tendency."

Bottom line, you way overstated your case.

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:

> With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a 
> Lebanese guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no reason why 
> the right hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.
> 
> Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are two 
> different types of music that originated in the African-American community, 
> and it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. Yet, when I hear 
> white guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like they're gangsta black guys 
> from an urban ghetto, I cringe with embarrassment for them. At least Eminem 
> has some cred due to his Detroit upbringing, but little white boy rappers who 
> grew up in Fairfield Iowa just strike me as completely ridiculous. 


I know what you mean.  I prefer white rappers who sound like white guys, like 
Kid Rock.  But I am an Emenem fan too so I figure that authenticity comes from 
a lot of different levels.  My favorite reaps comes from Jamaica or the 
Caribbean. I like Nicki Minaj's slightly softer lilting take on the form.   

> 
> I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically born 
> of the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the passage of 
> time that gives a musical style some distance from the unique cultural 
> situation that gave rise to it?
>

Blues was always party music.  It was the Pop music of the day.  Too much has 
been made of the connection between hardships and the blues IMO.  If you read 
about the actual lives of the musicians (Honeyboy Edwards "The World Don't Owe 
Me Nuthn'n) you see that these guys were expressing their experiences catting 
around.  Same themes that any other race's pop stars sing about, I'm great in 
bed, I love you baby so please take off your clothes, If you do I can last all 
night long, I think you would be better served by ditching the loser you are 
dating and coming with me, my GF treats me badly...

The greatness of their art was not that they expressed their time and place so 
well.  It was that they expressed the nuances of human relationships so well.  
And in their era music was bifurcated into sanctified gospel music and the 
devil's music which included any songs about human relationship, sexy or not.

The only songs that I sing that are straight up sad are about death which some 
blues songs cover beautifully and is not race based.  
One Kind Favor, Blind Lemon Jefferson and Death Letter Blues are both masterful 
treatments about the human condition.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdgrQoZHnNY

The only anachronistic elements are the death letter itself, which was a black 
trimmed letter used to inform people about a death.  The other is the "cool'n 
board" which was a board put on chairs to keep the body until the friends could 
gather for burial.  

As a performance note, I sing blues as myself, I never sing in schtick, trying 
to sound like a black guy.  But I usually use the idioms in the songs 
accurately unless it is something I can't relate to personally.  What makes it 
blues for me is the direct expression of my personal feelings.  What makes it 
preservation work is that I am expressing myself though their words.  And even 
though I never put a chick on a train and saw the lights on the back as she 
left me, I have put a few in cars, so I can congruently get behind the lyrics.

"When the train left the station, there were two lights on behind.
The blue light was my blues (sad) and the red light was my mind. (pissed!) "

When I write in the the blues style I use modern language with occasional nods 
to specialized words like "Easy Rider" or "Special Rider". 




> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> > wrote:
> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:11 PM
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re:
> > > > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't
> > > > > they?
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know whether they do so in an official, organized way,
> > > > but they're well-aware of it. Sometimes something will be posted
> > > > here that may have implications for some project the movement has
> > > > in the works, and I'll get feedback within the hour from someone
> > > > in the movement asking to take a post down, set the record
> > > > straight, etc.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > My brother is aware of FFL. He wasn't terribly impressed.>
> > 
> > Perhaps he might see us in a more favorable light if we all agreed
> > to wear party hats? I've been 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bad TV, and how the TMO should market TM

[obbajeeba]

Meditators, correction replaces mediators. lol.  I am my worst editor. : )

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very good review about TM and very great advice to the TMO!
>  Precisely why I read your posts, even if some are long winded, sometimes. 
> lol.   Note how I have to give a compliment with a cut down (it helps my self 
> esteem).   : )
> When people are comfortable, it makes them want things to come easy. The 
> focus on TM sold to PTSD of the military, the poor children and prisoners, is 
> because those have public money behind them and someone wants a piece of it, 
> but public money is going down the tubes with the economy. 
> Self esteem building is a great way to market TM, as you suggest. Only one 
> thing, those that are at the top, usually only get to stay at the top when 
> others need hero's or "rock stars," to honor and worship. If everyone felt 
> better about themselves, who would worship those who recorded a song 50 years 
> ago as a teenage boy except a bunch of  screaming girls with low self esteem 
> continuing into late adulthood? Marketability in the past has been based on 
> this principal?  
> 
>  You turq, have a wonderfully great idea that the TMO needs to take 
> seriously. (You bad Buddha rubbing belly renegade, you.)
>  
>  Self esteem. TM can help poor children be content to being poor. A PTSD 
> soldier feels content at all the carnage he has witnessed and participated 
> in. The prisoner, a locked up yogi. A wealthy movie star has a tax write off 
> and so on.
> If self esteem was always intended for the teaching of TM, it would be 
> present in may other ways, including most of Fairfield's non dome attending 
> mediators would be included in the WPA's and all and few would have their 
> badges taken away. 
> The pageant of ceremonial Raja's and the famous on display in TM, "Look, we 
> are great, do you want to be like us? You wish to gain just like your idols 
> and we meditate and that is how we do it."  
> (I am a TM meditator and I feel the Maharishi played a funny trick on his 
> team of Rajas. I think the Maharishi was not happy with them, but needed 
> them, but he knew he was getting old and closer to leaving the earth, and 
> what better way to point out the obvious, was to dress them up in gold crowns 
> and white robes (note the Indians don't wear them.)so we, real people doing 
> the techniques with nothing to gain, but self esteem would see the 
> difference. Sort of like, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes," except Maharishi 
> re-wrote the fairy tale a bit as he giggled knowing the knowers, will, "Get 
> it."  I, "get it." hahaha.
> If you ask most Indians in the movement about this, they would most likely 
> roar in laughter and forever be your friend. : )
> Because even if the self esteem is increasing for the average TMer, there is 
> still a caste system in the TMO, of who has the biggest wallet. The 
> government (public funding) appears to have the biggest wallet and that is 
> why the PR companies are hired by the TMO to present this idea to the masses. 
> Easy money and a tax right off. 
> Self esteem building works well in the private sector, but they may lose non 
> profit status and have to start paying taxes, but I am no expert in that 
> subject or any. lol. 
>   
>  
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > The last week or so has been Viewer Hell for this cinema addict. I've
> > had to wade through a number of TV pilots that I would never have spent
> > a moment on if a potential client hadn't asked me to review them. It was
> > a dismaying experience, but I think I learned something from it about
> > how the TMO should pitch its one salable product -- basic TM.
> > 
> > I actually looked forward to watching the first two episodes of
> > "Ringer," because it stars Sarah Jessica Parker, who I loved in "Buffy."
> > It had potential, in that it was actually SJP squared, playing twins.
> > Sadly, it had an unimaginative plot, and was full of unhappy, unlikable,
> > self-obsessed characters who between the lot of them couldn't come up
> > with a thimbleful of positive self esteem if their lives (and their
> > ratings) depended on it. As a TV writer, you should know you're in
> > trouble when the only admirable character in your show is a former
> > addict who now works as a NA counselor. Just sayin'.
> > 
> > Then I watched "2 Broke Girls," memorable only for Kat Dennings'
> > delivery of the punchlines of a series of low-rent sexual innuendo
> > jokes. Again, it's a show that is all *about* lack of self-esteem...look
> > at the title. Next came "New Girl," starring Zooey Deschanel, which was
> > the sole redeeming hour of the whole viewing experiment. Zooey is truly
> > adorable, and this show puts her in the spotlight, pretty much carrying
> > the whole series herself IMO, because I couldn't work up a bit of
> > empathy for any of the other characters or ac

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bad TV, and how the TMO should market TM

[obbajeeba]

Very good review about TM and very great advice to the TMO!
 Precisely why I read your posts, even if some are long winded, sometimes. lol. 
  Note how I have to give a compliment with a cut down (it helps my self 
esteem).   : )
When people are comfortable, it makes them want things to come easy. The focus 
on TM sold to PTSD of the military, the poor children and prisoners, is because 
those have public money behind them and someone wants a piece of it, but public 
money is going down the tubes with the economy. 
Self esteem building is a great way to market TM, as you suggest. Only one 
thing, those that are at the top, usually only get to stay at the top when 
others need hero's or "rock stars," to honor and worship. If everyone felt 
better about themselves, who would worship those who recorded a song 50 years 
ago as a teenage boy except a bunch of  screaming girls with low self esteem 
continuing into late adulthood? Marketability in the past has been based on 
this principal?  

 You turq, have a wonderfully great idea that the TMO needs to take seriously. 
(You bad Buddha rubbing belly renegade, you.)
 
 Self esteem. TM can help poor children be content to being poor. A PTSD 
soldier feels content at all the carnage he has witnessed and participated in. 
The prisoner, a locked up yogi. A wealthy movie star has a tax write off and so 
on.
If self esteem was always intended for the teaching of TM, it would be present 
in may other ways, including most of Fairfield's non dome attending mediators 
would be included in the WPA's and all and few would have their badges taken 
away. 
The pageant of ceremonial Raja's and the famous on display in TM, "Look, we are 
great, do you want to be like us? You wish to gain just like your idols and we 
meditate and that is how we do it."  
(I am a TM meditator and I feel the Maharishi played a funny trick on his team 
of Rajas. I think the Maharishi was not happy with them, but needed them, but 
he knew he was getting old and closer to leaving the earth, and what better way 
to point out the obvious, was to dress them up in gold crowns and white robes 
(note the Indians don't wear them.)so we, real people doing the techniques with 
nothing to gain, but self esteem would see the difference. Sort of like, "The 
Emperor Wears No Clothes," except Maharishi re-wrote the fairy tale a bit as he 
giggled knowing the knowers, will, "Get it."  I, "get it." hahaha.
If you ask most Indians in the movement about this, they would most likely roar 
in laughter and forever be your friend. : )
Because even if the self esteem is increasing for the average TMer, there is 
still a caste system in the TMO, of who has the biggest wallet. The government 
(public funding) appears to have the biggest wallet and that is why the PR 
companies are hired by the TMO to present this idea to the masses. Easy money 
and a tax right off. 
Self esteem building works well in the private sector, but they may lose non 
profit status and have to start paying taxes, but I am no expert in that 
subject or any. lol. 
  
 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> The last week or so has been Viewer Hell for this cinema addict. I've
> had to wade through a number of TV pilots that I would never have spent
> a moment on if a potential client hadn't asked me to review them. It was
> a dismaying experience, but I think I learned something from it about
> how the TMO should pitch its one salable product -- basic TM.
> 
> I actually looked forward to watching the first two episodes of
> "Ringer," because it stars Sarah Jessica Parker, who I loved in "Buffy."
> It had potential, in that it was actually SJP squared, playing twins.
> Sadly, it had an unimaginative plot, and was full of unhappy, unlikable,
> self-obsessed characters who between the lot of them couldn't come up
> with a thimbleful of positive self esteem if their lives (and their
> ratings) depended on it. As a TV writer, you should know you're in
> trouble when the only admirable character in your show is a former
> addict who now works as a NA counselor. Just sayin'.
> 
> Then I watched "2 Broke Girls," memorable only for Kat Dennings'
> delivery of the punchlines of a series of low-rent sexual innuendo
> jokes. Again, it's a show that is all *about* lack of self-esteem...look
> at the title. Next came "New Girl," starring Zooey Deschanel, which was
> the sole redeeming hour of the whole viewing experiment. Zooey is truly
> adorable, and this show puts her in the spotlight, pretty much carrying
> the whole series herself IMO, because I couldn't work up a bit of
> empathy for any of the other characters or actors. Fortunately, I think
> Zooey's up to the challenge, and this one may be a big hit.
> 
> But, at the same time, Zooey's character is lack of self esteem
> incarnate. This poor self image is reflected back to her by her three
> male roommates (who have a "Douchebag Jar" into which they have to
> deposit money 

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> wrote:
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:11 PM
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re:
> > > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't
> > > > they?
> > > 
> > > I don't know whether they do so in an official, organized way,
> > > but they're well-aware of it. Sometimes something will be posted
> > > here that may have implications for some project the movement has
> > > in the works, and I'll get feedback within the hour from someone
> > > in the movement asking to take a post down, set the record
> > > straight, etc.
> > > 
> > 
> > My brother is aware of FFL. He wasn't terribly impressed.>
> 
> Perhaps he might see us in a more favorable light if we all agreed
> to wear party hats? I've been wanting to try this new Burger King
> monstrosity anyway, so let me know if anyone needs me to pick them
> up something to wear that would be Raja-worthy.
> 

With the right hat, anything is possible. If a golden crown can make a Lebanese 
guy the king of an Indian spiritual movement, there's no reason why the right 
hat can't make a white guy the king of Delta blues.

Which brings up an interesting point for me. Delta blues and jazz are two 
different types of music that originated in the African-American community, and 
it doesn't phase me that white guys would play them. Yet, when I hear white 
guys doing rap, trying to act and speak like they're gangsta black guys from an 
urban ghetto, I cringe with embarrassment for them. At least Eminem has some 
cred due to his Detroit upbringing, but little white boy rappers who grew up in 
Fairfield Iowa just strike me as completely ridiculous. 

I don't know about jazz, but Delta blues and rap are both specifically born of 
the hardships of the Black American experience. Is it just the passage of time 
that gives a musical style some distance from the unique cultural situation 
that gave rise to it?

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > > > Yogic Flying
> 
> > That fact that so many Westerners believe that it might
> > happen to them someday is an amazing demonstration of
> > the laws of consistency and commitment that seem to
> > govern how we form and protect beliefs with no evidence.
> > (Reference Cialdini's book "Influence")
> 
> How many Westerners would that be, Curtis?

Somewhere between the number of people who were all in at the beginning of the 
program (very high percentage) and a total shift to a  movement-wide complete 
disbelief in Maharishi's direct promises concerning physical flight. Since we 
have some people who believe they already have, this number will never be zero.









>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> 
> On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:
> 
> > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> 
> Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression
> of negativity yagya or two or three.

ROTFL! No doubt, Vaj.

Cue the "Self-Importance" rap.

Oh, wait...it's never the TM *critics* who wallow in
self-importance.

Silly me.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Vaj]

On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Vaj wrote:


On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:


Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?





Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
negativity yagya or two or three.


I wonder if this is considered black magic? I'd find it hard to  
believe that the Vedic pundits of FF were NOT practicing these kinds  
of rituals.



http://www.worldofyagyas.com/yagya-categories/protection/yagya- 
defeating-enemies


Home » Catalog » Yagya Categories » Protection Yagyas
YAGYA FOR DEFEATING THE ENEMIES
A person in the society who is not in harmony with us is taken away  
with the help of this yagya.


Category:
'A' category, 5 days, 9 pundits: 751 USD
'B' category, 3 days, 7 pundits: 651 USD

[FairfieldLife] Pay It Forward

[authfriend]

Elizabeth Warren, former Special Advisor for the United States Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau; currently Democratic candidate for Senate in 
Massachusetts, on a recent "Talking Tour":


I hear all this, you know, "Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever."—No!

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

You built a factory out there—good for you! But I want to be clear. 

You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for.

You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.

You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the 
rest of us paid for.

You didn't have to worry that maurauding bands would come and seize everything 
at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work 
the rest of us did. 

Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great 
idea—God bless. Keep a big hunk of it.

But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay 
forward for the next kid who comes along.


http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/i_got_your_class_warfare_right_here/

http://tinyurl.com/3zsv227

Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Vaj]

On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Mark Landau wrote:


Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?





Oh yes. Your name has most likely been added to a suppression of  
negativity yagya or two or three.

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > > Yogic Flying

> That fact that so many Westerners believe that it might
> happen to them someday is an amazing demonstration of
> the laws of consistency and commitment that seem to
> govern how we form and protect beliefs with no evidence.
> (Reference Cialdini's book "Influence")

How many Westerners would that be, Curtis?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Mark Landau]

Thank you, Buck, I've been thinking to, even relocating there...

On Sep 21, 2011, at 5:57 AM, Buck wrote:

> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> 
> > > Hmm, so maybe I *should* consider some time on IA... I must say, it's not 
> > > easy to wrap my mind around and I don't feel yet called to do so.
> > > 
> > > They may not admit you, after D.W.T.F.
> > > 
> 
> Oh come visit anyway. There is way more going on here spiritually than just 
> what is up on campus. It's old TM here and a large community of meditators. 
> Most actually have very little to do with the campus or the movement. There 
> is a wonderful blend otherwise living here. It's a very spiritual place.
> 
> -Buck
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street

[authfriend]

Kevin Drum of Mother Jones makes another good point in a blog post:

"...Obama's point isn't that millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck
drivers. It's that some millionaires pay lower tax rates than truck
drivers — and as a simple matter of fairness and equity they
shouldn't. Take a look at the table below, extracted from the Tax Policy
Center.
  It doesn't just show the tax rates of mere millionaires, it
shows the tax rates of the top 400 super-duper millionaires. Back in
1992, only 33 of them paid less than 20% of their income in federal
taxes. Today, 289 of them do. That's just not right.

"On Fox News, they brush this off with a yawn. 'It's because most of
their income comes from capital gains,' they repeat tirelessly, as if
that was sufficient explanation all by itself. But why? Surely even
trust fund babies ought to pay some kind of minimum tax rate no matter
where their income comes from. Is a 20% tax floor on the income of the
rich really so outrageous?"

  [center]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/lies-damn-lies-and-average-tax\
-rates



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans 
wrote:
>
> I read the whole thing, actually. Â It's a good read in that it is
quite accessible to the masses.
>
>
> 
> From: authfriend jstein@...
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:28 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall Street
>
>
> Â
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@ wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Judy for forwarding the whole article and encouraging
> > reader integrity on what the article really said.
>
> My pleasure, but that was just one piece of the article.
> The whole thing is worth reading; quite a bit of good
> info. It *isn't* all that simple, which makes it easier
> to twist. It's important to know the ins and outs.
>
> >
> > And, thank you Nabby? for sending the link to the Wall Street
protest.  Loved seeing it.
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: authfriend jstein@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:07 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: US protesters rally to occupy Wall
Street
> >
> >
> > ÂÂ
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardwillytexwilliams"
 wrote:
> > >
> > > Bhairitu:
> > > > And millionaires are whining today about Obama's
> > > > plan to tax the rich more.
> > > >
> > > And, anyone that can add is laughing at Obama's plan
> > > to 'tax the rich'!
> > >
> > > "In terms of averages, the current tax system already
> > > satisfies the Buffett Rule. Americans on average pay
> > > 16% of their total income in federal income and payroll
> > > taxes, while millionaires pay an average of 20.1%,
> > > according to the Tax Policy Center..."
> >
> > Here's the rest of that section, which Willytex carefully
> > left out:
> >
> > "But averages mask the Buffett phenomenon. (See why some
> > millionaires end up owing no tax at all)
> >
> > "For most people, wages make up a majority of their income,
> > so when they get a raise their average tax rate may go up,
> > said Diane Lim Rogers, chief economist at the Concord
> > Coalition, a deficit watchdog group.
> >
> > "But millionaires typically have several sources of income --
> > some taxed at lower rates than others, if at all. So it's
> > entirely possible that their effective tax rate can fall as
> > their income goes up if they start to get less money from
> > wages and more from, say, tax-preferred or tax-free
> > investments."
> >
> > >
> > > 'Buffett Rule: Not so simple'
> > > CNN Money:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/3jypgcf
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:11 PM
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re:
> > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > > Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't
> > > they?
> > 
> > I don't know whether they do so in an official, organized way,
> > but they're well-aware of it. Sometimes something will be posted
> > here that may have implications for some project the movement has
> > in the works, and I'll get feedback within the hour from someone
> > in the movement asking to take a post down, set the record
> > straight, etc.
> > 
> 
> My brother is aware of FFL. He wasn't terribly impressed.>

Perhaps he might see us in a more favorable light if we all agreed to wear 
party hats? I've been wanting to try this new Burger King monstrosity anyway, 
so let me know if anyone needs me to pick them up something to wear that would 
be Raja-worthy.






>

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > Yogic Flying
> > According to the Maharishi, Yogic Flying is a phenomenon created by a 
> > specific thought projected from the simplest state of human consciousness 
> > called Transcendental Consciousness.[42] Practitioners say that there are 
> > three distinct stages of Yogic Flying: hopping, floating, and 
> > flying.[29][43][44][45][46] Referring to quantum electrodynamics, the 
> > Maharishi explained the physics of Yogic Flying this way in a conversation 
> > with two scientists: "We teach our students that by concentration through 
> > meditation they can create an impenetrable field of energy between the 
> > ground and their bodies.The greater the field of energy, the higher the 
> > meditating man can rise. It is simple Q.E.D."[47][48]
> 
> Are there alternative explanations for this phenomenon? After all, no 
> impenetrable field of energy has ever been reported as a having been 
> measured, nor a verification of actual levitation. I am not saying there is 
> no phenomenon, just that this explanation is pseudoscience. 
> 
> What is actually known, physically, scientifically about this phenomenon, 
> rhetoric and obfuscation aside? The relationship between quantum mechanics 
> and the day-to-day functioning of the human brain, including meditative 
> states, is entirely speculative.
>

I would think that a reasonable discussion of a phenomenon should begin with a 
demonstration of that phenomenon in a controlled setting.  Lacking that, no 
description for a non-phenomenon is better than any other, although I am 
partial to "then magic happens". 

That fact that so many Westerners believe that it might happen to them someday 
is an amazing demonstration of the laws of consistency and commitment that seem 
to govern how we form and protect beliefs with no evidence. (Reference 
Cialdini's book "Influence")   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama a machine avatar in his next incarnation?

[whynotnow7]

Is that your excuse for not having a girlfriend?:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Weird how our cars develop personalities, or appear to,
> > > > based on how they respond to our travel related desires.
> > > > That being the most obvious example, I find that I
> > > > develop a two way relationship with every object I use.
> > >
> > > Very interesting. I know people who insists that cars have
> > > a delicate soul
> >
> > Yes indeed. Or what about boats. There's many a no-nonsense,
> > salty old sea dog who seems convinced of their vessel's self
> > and personality (sod the Turing test!).
> 
> And I've certainly known women who have far deeper and more meaningful
> relationships with their vibrators than they ever have -- or will ever
> have -- with a human being. Put *this* in your pipe and smoke it, Alan
> Turing:
> 
> Top TenReasons Why a Vibrator Is Better Than a Man
> 
> 1. It keeps going, and going, and going.
> A vibrator can keep going as long as it takes to satisfy you.  All it
> needs is a power supply, and batteries are a lot cheaper and easier to
> get than Viagra.   2. You don't have to worry where else it's
> been.
> Unless you picked it up at a yard sale, you won't have  to give a
> second thought to who else might have used your vibrator  before you.
> And you won't have to worry about your vibrator jumping in  another
> woman's pants when you're gone,unless if you have a freaky
> roommate.   3. Vibrators can have more than one speed.
> Most guys have two settings: full speed and off. Vibrators have variable
> controls and let you pick the pace and intensity. 4. A vibrator
> won't ask you if it's bigger than all other vibrators you've
> had.
> Vibrators aren't insecure about their size or ability,  and
> don't keep asking for reassurance. Big or small, they just get the 
> job done. 5. A vibrator doesn't roll over and snore.
> A vibrator won't finish before you and fall asleep.  When you're
> done with it, just shut it off and tuck it in your night  stand drawer,
> then get a peaceful night's rest with the bed to yourself. 6.
> It's ready when you are, and only when you are.
> With a flick of a switch, your vibrator is ready to  give you pleasure.
> On the other hand, when you're tired or have a  headache, you
> won't get in bed and find your vibrator turned on. 7.
> Vibrators are designed for your pleasure.
> A penis is designed for procreation and male   sexual pleasure, not to
> stimulate the clitoris and bring a woman to orgasm.   A vibrator, on the
> other hand, was created with women in mind. Use the right   tool for the
> job. 8. No germs and no sperm.
> A vibrator can't get you pregnant or give you an STD. You'll
> never have to worry about birth control, condoms, or safe sex.   If you
> like the feel of latex, slap a condom on for easy cleaning. 9.
> Vibrators don't expect you to swallow.
> You will never have to give your vibrator a blow job, much less swallow
> its cum or be made to feel guilty if you don't.10. Vibrators are
> easy to replace.
> If your vibrator breaks, wears out, or is defective,  it's easy
> enough to buy another one. Of course, a guy is easy to  replace, too,
> but you can't order one online and get home delivery.
>

[FairfieldLife] The 24 Types of Libertarian

[Alex Stanley]

http://www.leftycartoons.com/the-24-types-of-libertarian/

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's dat simple!

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> Yogic Flying
> According to the Maharishi, Yogic Flying is a phenomenon created by a 
> specific thought projected from the simplest state of human consciousness 
> called Transcendental Consciousness.[42] Practitioners say that there are 
> three distinct stages of Yogic Flying: hopping, floating, and 
> flying.[29][43][44][45][46] Referring to quantum electrodynamics, the 
> Maharishi explained the physics of Yogic Flying this way in a conversation 
> with two scientists: "We teach our students that by concentration through 
> meditation they can create an impenetrable field of energy between the ground 
> and their bodies.The greater the field of energy, the higher the meditating 
> man can rise. It is simple Q.E.D."[47][48]

Are there alternative explanations for this phenomenon? After all, no 
impenetrable field of energy has ever been reported as a having been measured, 
nor a verification of actual levitation. I am not saying there is no 
phenomenon, just that this explanation is pseudoscience. 

What is actually known, physically, scientifically about this phenomenon, 
rhetoric and obfuscation aside? The relationship between quantum mechanics and 
the day-to-day functioning of the human brain, including meditative states, is 
entirely speculative.

[FairfieldLife] Bad TV, and how the TMO should market TM

[turquoiseb]

The last week or so has been Viewer Hell for this cinema addict. I've
had to wade through a number of TV pilots that I would never have spent
a moment on if a potential client hadn't asked me to review them. It was
a dismaying experience, but I think I learned something from it about
how the TMO should pitch its one salable product -- basic TM.

I actually looked forward to watching the first two episodes of
"Ringer," because it stars Sarah Jessica Parker, who I loved in "Buffy."
It had potential, in that it was actually SJP squared, playing twins.
Sadly, it had an unimaginative plot, and was full of unhappy, unlikable,
self-obsessed characters who between the lot of them couldn't come up
with a thimbleful of positive self esteem if their lives (and their
ratings) depended on it. As a TV writer, you should know you're in
trouble when the only admirable character in your show is a former
addict who now works as a NA counselor. Just sayin'.

Then I watched "2 Broke Girls," memorable only for Kat Dennings'
delivery of the punchlines of a series of low-rent sexual innuendo
jokes. Again, it's a show that is all *about* lack of self-esteem...look
at the title. Next came "New Girl," starring Zooey Deschanel, which was
the sole redeeming hour of the whole viewing experiment. Zooey is truly
adorable, and this show puts her in the spotlight, pretty much carrying
the whole series herself IMO, because I couldn't work up a bit of
empathy for any of the other characters or actors. Fortunately, I think
Zooey's up to the challenge, and this one may be a big hit.

But, at the same time, Zooey's character is lack of self esteem
incarnate. This poor self image is reflected back to her by her three
male roommates (who have a "Douchebag Jar" into which they have to
deposit money whenever they act like douchebags...and the jar is usually
full), her model friend, or any of the guys and gals they ineffectively
hit on while looking for love in all of the wrong places. Zooey's
character, ferchrissakes, still wallowing in an embarrassing breakup,
watches "Dirty Dancing" five or six times a day, sobbing through it. And
millions of viewers are going to tune in every week *to* watch her
wallow, because they do the same thing, and can identify with her and
her big, sad blue eyes.

So, what's my "takeaway" from seeing these TV shows? And how on earth do
I relate it to the TMO and how it should be marketing TM?

It's the common denominator -- lack of self esteem. If these are all
going to be popular TV series in America (and they probably all will),
watched weekly by millions of viewers, what are those viewers seeing
onscreen and identifying with that makes them want to come back week
after week for more? Lack of self esteem. Viewers can identify with
these characters because they feel that same lack themselves.

So I'm thinkin'...how could the TMO better market TM, if what they
*really* wanted to do was promote its practice, and get the most people
started with it? Duh. Pitch it as a way to feel better about yourself.
Instead of pitching it (via the DLF, pretty much the only teaching
effort being undertaken at this time) to at-risk kids, people in
prisons, and soldiers suffering from PTSD, get back to pitching it to
the Common Man. And as much as the groups of people mentioned above need
something that can boost their self esteem, after this week of watching
the TV shows they watch, I'm thinkin' that the Common Man can use a bit
of a boost themselves, and might be convinced to pay a reasonable price
for it.

Forget the flying crap; only dweebs want to learn to fly. Forget the ME
stuff; nobody believes it anyway. Get back to the SIMS days, stop
relying for your income on "milking the faithful," and start marketing
to new people, pitching something that is of actual interest to them.
Since the TMO will still feel that it has to do research to sell its
product, by all means do it. But do research on normal, everyday,
working people, and limit it to self-surveys of their general feelings
of self esteem and self worth before starting TM and then after a few
months of regular practice. I suspect you could come up with some real,
non-data-massaged results from such studies that would show that TM has
a real benefit in this area.

Then go out and pitch *that* as a reason for learning TM. Lower the
price at the same time to make it more reasonable for your target
audience, and limit what you teach people to the basic mechanics of TM.
Don't try to "cross sell" the Sidhis or enlightenment; mention them once
during the basic course, and then don't bring them up again unless
someone actually *asks* about them. In other words, focus on your one
salable product, and pitch it at the thing that millions of Americans
are actually interested in -- self esteem and how to have more of it.

I think it might sell. At $300 a pop, which I feel is a fair price, and
marketed as a self-therapy for people who want to feel more comfortable
with themselves, I think TM

[FairfieldLife] It's dat simple!

[cardemaister]

Yogic Flying
According to the Maharishi, Yogic Flying is a phenomenon created by a specific 
thought projected from the simplest state of human consciousness called 
Transcendental Consciousness.[42] Practitioners say that there are three 
distinct stages of Yogic Flying: hopping, floating, and 
flying.[29][43][44][45][46] Referring to quantum electrodynamics, the Maharishi 
explained the physics of Yogic Flying this way in a conversation with two 
scientists: "We teach our students that by concentration through meditation 
they can create an impenetrable field of energy between the ground and their 
bodies.The greater the field of energy, the higher the meditating man can rise. 
It is simple Q.E.D."[47][48]

[FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: Merudanda/Sandals)

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Let alone what I've posted here.  They do monitor FFL, don't they?
> 
> On Sep 20, 2011, at 4:06 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> 
> > 
> > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] 
> > On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:57 PM
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Another pair of sandals for sale (was Re: 
> > Merudanda/Sandals)
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Hmm, so maybe I *should* consider some time on IA...  I must say, it's not 
> > easy to wrap my mind around and I don't feel yet called to do so.
> > 
> > They may not admit you, after D.W.T.F.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >
>

Oh come visit anyway.  There is way more going on here spiritually than just 
what is up on campus.  It's old TM here and a large community of meditators.  
Most actually have very little to do with the campus or the movement.  There is 
a wonderful blend otherwise living here.  It's a very spiritual place.

-Buck

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama a machine avatar in his next incarnation?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
wrote:
> > >
> > > Weird how our cars develop personalities, or appear to,
> > > based on how they respond to our travel related desires.
> > > That being the most obvious example, I find that I
> > > develop a two way relationship with every object I use.
> >
> > Very interesting. I know people who insists that cars have
> > a delicate soul
>
> Yes indeed. Or what about boats. There's many a no-nonsense,
> salty old sea dog who seems convinced of their vessel's self
> and personality (sod the Turing test!).

And I've certainly known women who have far deeper and more meaningful
relationships with their vibrators than they ever have -- or will ever
have -- with a human being. Put *this* in your pipe and smoke it, Alan
Turing:

Top TenReasons Why a Vibrator Is Better Than a Man

1. It keeps going, and going, and going.
A vibrator can keep going as long as it takes to satisfy you.  All it
needs is a power supply, and batteries are a lot cheaper and easier to
get than Viagra.   2. You don't have to worry where else it's
been.
Unless you picked it up at a yard sale, you won't have  to give a
second thought to who else might have used your vibrator  before you.
And you won't have to worry about your vibrator jumping in  another
woman's pants when you're gone,unless if you have a freaky
roommate.   3. Vibrators can have more than one speed.
Most guys have two settings: full speed and off. Vibrators have variable
controls and let you pick the pace and intensity. 4. A vibrator
won't ask you if it's bigger than all other vibrators you've
had.
Vibrators aren't insecure about their size or ability,  and
don't keep asking for reassurance. Big or small, they just get the 
job done. 5. A vibrator doesn't roll over and snore.
A vibrator won't finish before you and fall asleep.  When you're
done with it, just shut it off and tuck it in your night  stand drawer,
then get a peaceful night's rest with the bed to yourself. 6.
It's ready when you are, and only when you are.
With a flick of a switch, your vibrator is ready to  give you pleasure.
On the other hand, when you're tired or have a  headache, you
won't get in bed and find your vibrator turned on. 7.
Vibrators are designed for your pleasure.
A penis is designed for procreation and male   sexual pleasure, not to
stimulate the clitoris and bring a woman to orgasm.   A vibrator, on the
other hand, was created with women in mind. Use the right   tool for the
job. 8. No germs and no sperm.
A vibrator can't get you pregnant or give you an STD. You'll
never have to worry about birth control, condoms, or safe sex.   If you
like the feel of latex, slap a condom on for easy cleaning. 9.
Vibrators don't expect you to swallow.
You will never have to give your vibrator a blow job, much less swallow
its cum or be made to feel guilty if you don't.10. Vibrators are
easy to replace.
If your vibrator breaks, wears out, or is defective,  it's easy
enough to buy another one. Of course, a guy is easy to  replace, too,
but you can't order one online and get home delivery.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama a machine avatar in his next incarnation?

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Weird how our cars develop personalities, or appear to, based on how they 
> > respond to our travel related desires. That being the most obvious example, 
> > I find that I develop a two way relationship with every object I use.
> 
> Very interesting. I know people who insists that cars have
> a delicate soul

Yes indeed. Or what about boats. There's many a no-nonsense,
salty old sea dog who seems convinced of their vessel's self
and personality (sod the Turing test!).

[FairfieldLife] Check out Ron Paul Issues Open Letter to President Obama Concerning Cuts to V

[WLeed3]

_Ron  Paul Issues Open Letter to President Obama Concerning Cuts to 
Veterans' Benefits  - MarketWatch_ 
(http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ron-paul-issues-open-letter-to-president-obama-concerning-cuts-to-veterans-benefits-2011-09
-20)  

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Hagelin lecture Tonight

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Sunday nite
> > > 8pm, Dalby Hall 
> > > on MUM campus.
> > > 
> > > Super Black Holes
> > > and Enlightenment
> > > 
> > > Supposedly open to everyone.
> > >
> > 
> > How was it?
> > 
> > 
> > L
> >
> 
> It was very well attended. Overflowing crowd. 
> Jai Guru Dev, -Buck
>

And the Croatian WPA next month (15. - 29.10.) shall prove, beyond
a reasonable doubt, that the ME really works?!