[FairfieldLife] As If I Need Another Reason Not to Vote for Him

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scientists-donald-trump_us_57e1ac04e4b0e80b1b9eda3d?section=politics
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scientists-donald-trump_us_57e1ac04e4b0e80b1b9eda3d?section=politics

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

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

 She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.
 

 Funny, that. I don't think "likable" relates to anything. While I despise 
Trump it is not his personality that is of importance. Hillary is neither 
likable or unlikable. She is simply the most qualified and someone who has 
served the country for decades. She has experience and she is really smart. She 
also, for some unknown reason, wants the job. I think she is amazingly strong 
and that is one small factor for why I will vote for her.
 
 


 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 
   

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.







 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Kessler?  Here's a review of this book.All kinds of errors...he sounds like 
an angry gossip make-up artist to me.  Based on your belief on her manners 
stated below, here is what he wrote on Al Gore in the book.  H 

 "About former Vice President Al Gore, he quotes a former agent named Jeff 
Crane, who says that he was "on the detail one Christmas when Gore was at home 
in Carthage. Neighbors offered us food on Christmas Day, but the Gores never 
even bothered to say 'Merry Christmas' or 'Thank you." Surely Crane said this. 
But Crane was never part of Gore's detail" 
 

 The weird inaccuracies in Ronald Kessler's new book on the Secret Service 
http://theweek.com/articles/444781/weird-inaccuracies-ronald-kesslers-new-book-secret-service
 
 
 
http://theweek.com/articles/444781/weird-inaccuracies-ronald-kesslers-new-book-secret-service
 
 
 The weird inaccuracies in Ronald Kessler's new book ... 
http://theweek.com/articles/444781/weird-inaccuracies-ronald-kesslers-new-book-secret-service
 Kessler should question the judgment of some of his own sources
 
 
 
 View on theweek.com 
http://theweek.com/articles/444781/weird-inaccuracies-ronald-kesslers-new-book-secret-service
 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 
  

 

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

 Right, one corrupt former agent whom the rest of the service repudiates.
 
 No, there are at least two books out there by former SS agents. Corrupt? Why, 
because they told all? Don't forget the State Troopers that were bodyguards in 
Arkansas.
 From Ronald Kesslers book First Family Details: "When in public,Hillary smiles 
and acts graciously." Kessler explains, "As soon as the cameras are gone, her 
angry personality, nastiness and imperiousness become evident". He added: 
"Hillary Clinton can make Richard Nixon look like Mahatma Gandhi." He said she 
is rude to SS and others, cussed Secret Service drivers, never said *thank you* 
.He goes on and on.
 BTW, it wasn't the *rest* of the Secret Service that repudiated  Gary Byrne. 
It was a few high ranking members that denied his book, much of which he got 
was  from other agents.I would think telling all on the Clintons would not be 
good for job security. Might be difficult to bump -off a Srecret Service agent 
though. Repudiating those that do *tell all* would be job security.
 Sorry Judy, declaring victory doesn't make you victorious.


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:11 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 
   
 

 You are really not doing so well, Mike. Your attempted comebacks are getting 
weaker and weaker.
 

 You know how psittacines regurgitate their food when they get a crop 
infection? The regurgitated material is a disgusting slimy mass.
 

 Same with parroted slime from the right wing. It's truly repulsive and a 
symptom of serious illness.
 

 

 

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

 
 Oh yes, the Secret Service is especially fond of looking out for her!
 
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

 
   That's only in public. Just about without exception, everyone who has worked 
with her (including Republicans) says she's warm and caring and funny and 
charming and exceptionally likeable.
 

 

 

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

 She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.
 
 


 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

 
   

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. I

[FairfieldLife] Re: Kuurma-naaDii and nervus vagus!

[steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I am predicting that breath, or prana will at some point, become a focus of 
western medicine. Probably before interest in something like energy centers 
takes hold. 
 The Upanishads, in particular, talk about the different breaths, and the 
functions they perform.  Breath may be something people can understand better 
than say, chakras. 

 Another area which has little or no public awareness is that of sexual energy, 
and how it pertains to overall health and mental acuity, at least as I see it.
 

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

 M stopped talking much about it publicly at points when faced with an 
intellectual skepticism about these energy centers:  ‘Thin lines of energy 
flowing in the central nervous system? ’ Where exactly?  

 Comparing to the science then at that time growing on 'consciousness' defined 
by meditation then to also describe and defend a subtle system which science 
has yet to be able to even image would be daunting at best given where people 
and science was at in time.  But clearly it was where he was going in his 
teachings and methods even to his last techniques in marma, vibrational 
modalities and the Ved and Physiology practice.  The guy was a visionary, sage, 
empiricist and necessarily practical going forward. We don't have so much 
guidance coming out of TM about it other than ideas of stress release and 
meditation checking so people over the years have also gone on in their 
experience.  
 

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

 Yes, thanks for the reply.  I do believe that spiritual development is a 
tricky endeavor, and that complications can arise, either due to an awakening 
of kundalini, or just an expanding of awareness.  I suppose it is helpful to 
have a support network to help sort things out, and lend a helping hand if 
necessary. 

 Of course, like anything, you can carried away by too much analysis, which can 
lead to mood making and other weird diversions .  Always difficult to find the 
right balance.
 

 Still sorting that out in my own life 
 

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

 Yep, regardless of which meditation or spiritual practice some people can have 
trouble with kundalini flow (subtle energy centers) as their spirituality comes 
on or grows.  Evidently it is not by meditation necessarily but also occurs 
separately for some various people as kundalini development in the central 
subtle nervous system. Able to surface at any point as the spiritual system may 
grow, sometimes in the new spiritual aspirant or in long practiced or 
cultivated people.  This as its own continuum is different from the 
consciousness ‘awakening’ continuum that gets focused on in the TM community or 
at Rick’s batgap, but can have its own development to talk about on continuum 
different than consciousness development.
 
 In satsang around Fairfield, Iowa people can surface periodically with 
troubles in the flow of their Kundalini subtle system.  This is particularly 
different than say psychological breaks like bi-polar and such.  
 It was not something we were much guided in but there is a cohort of intuitive 
people and experienced people round who can be helpful to folks whose subtle 
systems are in rough times and not integrated enough in some ways to be easier 
with being a conduit for evidently more primordial energy referred to as 
kundalini, or the holy-ghost in x-ianity.  It can be a topic of conversation 
around Fairfield on different levels.  

 

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

 an particulars in this regard?
 

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

 In TM we did not get much guidance on this but those are interesting sutras to 
use.  
 My wife in community work as an RN, being intuitive, and being an old 
meditation teacher has been running into some people who are amidst some 
openings of kundalini. That has its spiritual reality for some people which in 
some ways is also physiologic to the human psycho-spiritual system. . 
 Card’s sequence of sutras as energy centers that are in the YS may well be 
relevant. Also it seems was where Maharishi was going with his last technique, 
the Ved and Physiology technique. The sutras like that Ved and Physiology 
process can be handy to energetically reference;  along with some kind of 
mindful intent like these kind of directives in the yoga sutras in checking of 
the flow for some people in their mists and rough with it all.  Some things 
sort of like in point 30 of the old checking notes, if you remember those. 

 Going to these YS chapters and verse are like going back to reading my tractor 
repair manual for figuring out my tractor’s ignition system that just went 
haywire. 10th cranial nerve?  Sometimes you just have to go sit and attend to 
it under a shade tree.  But figure it out also by going to an old tractor 
mechanic who has more experience with it.   
 


 

ultrarishi offers: You might be interested in the work of Stephen Porge

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Right, one corrupt former agent whom the rest of the service repudiates.
No, there are at least two books out there by former SS agents. Corrupt? Why, 
because they told all? Don't forget the State Troopers that were bodyguards in 
Arkansas.From Ronald Kesslers book First Family Details: "When in 
public,Hillary smiles and acts graciously." Kessler explains, "As soon as the 
cameras are gone, her angry personality, nastiness and imperiousness become 
evident". He added: "Hillary Clinton can make Richard Nixon look like Mahatma 
Gandhi." He said she is rude to SS and others, cussed Secret Service drivers, 
never said *thank you* .He goes on and on.BTW, it wasn't the *rest* of the 
Secret Service that repudiated  Gary Byrne. It was a few high ranking members 
that denied his book, much of which he got was  from other agents.I would think 
telling all on the Clintons would not be good for job security. Might be 
difficult to bump -off a Srecret Service agent though. Repudiating those that 
do *tell all* would be job security.Sorry Judy, declaring victory doesn't make 
you victorious.
  From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:11 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
   
    
You are really not doing so well, Mike. Your attempted comebacks are getting 
weaker and weaker.
You know how psittacines regurgitate their food when they get a crop infection? 
The regurgitated material is a disgusting slimy mass.
Same with parroted slime from the right wing. It's truly repulsive and a 
symptom of serious illness.


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

Oh yes, the Secret Service is especially fond of looking out for her!


  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 That's only in public. Just about without exception, everyone who has worked 
with her (including Republicans) says she's warm and caring and funny and 
charming and exceptionally likeable.


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

She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.


  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

 


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




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
(snip)There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and 
that’s if she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence 
and experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why 
anyone would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.
Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image.
Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.




  #yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989 -- #yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2061706989 
#yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2061706989 
#yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp #yiv2061706989hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp #yiv2061706989ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp .yiv2061706989ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp .yiv2061706989ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989ygrp-mkp .yiv2061706989ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv2061706989ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv2061706989ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2061706989 
#yiv2061706989ygrp-sponsor #yiv2061706989ygrp-lc #yiv2061706989hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2061706989 
#yiv2061706989ygrp-sponsor #yiv2061706989ygrp-lc .yiv2061706989ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2061706989 #yiv20617069

[FairfieldLife] Post Count Thu 22-Sep-16 00:15:11 UTC

[FFL PostCount ffl.postco...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): 09/17/16 00:00:00
End Date (UTC): 09/24/16 00:00:00
175 messages as of (UTC) 09/21/16 21:30:51

 30 authfriend
 27 awoelflebater
 20 Mike Dixon mdixon.6569
 17 dhamiltony2k5
 14 anon_alias 
 12 olliesedwuz
 12 Sal Sunshine salsunshineiniowa
  9 feste37 
  9 Bhairitu noozguru
  8 steve.sundur
  7 jr_esq
  4 hepa7
  3 yifuxero
  1 ultrarishi 
  1 email4you mikemail4you
  1 FairfieldLife
Posters: 16
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 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

You're (intentionally, I think) missing my point. 

 If he genuinely thought at the time that she was emboldening terrorists as 
secretary of state, then complimenting her on doing a great job was putting 
"good business practice" above the safety and well-being of the American 
people. Has nothing to do with what she might or might not have done in 
response.
 

 Of course, he could be lying today when he says that's what she was doing. He 
may not believe that at all.
 

 As to the email situation, once again you're not telling the straight story. 
If somebody had sent her server to the Russians or the Chinese or whoever, they 
would have had less information than they could have found in the New York 
Times. It's been a great big nothingburger from the word go.
 

 

 

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

 
 So she would have done things differently had he been critical?
  No, he was paying a complement, whether it was sincere or not, to keep in 
good favor of someone who could affect his business opportunities.

 That's just a good business practice. People pat Obama on the back all the 
time that really hate his guts, just to stay on his good side.
 But you want a president that is irresponsible with classified information, 
deletes 33, 000 e-mails that had been subpoenaed by congress and lies about it.
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
 
 
   So he cared more about his business interests than he did about the safety 
and well-being of the American people, right?
 

 And that's what we want in a president?
 

 

 

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

 
 He's now saying that when she was secretary of state, she was so awful at her 
job that the terrorists were emboldened. So back when he was, as you say, 
blowing smoke up her ass, he was doing so and saying she was doing a great job 
even though he really believed she was emboldening terrorists?
 

  Yes, exactly!  He wasn't in politics. He was a businessman doing business. He 
does the same with Putin.


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Nope, not a liar, not a crook. If you had any ability to think critically, 
you'd realize that all the various stories of her supposed malfeasance are only 
insinuations. They've never come up with any smoking guns, ever, from the Rose 
Law Firm and Whitewater all the way through Benghazi and the emails and the 
Clinton Foundation.
 

 With Trump, OTOH, there's reams and reams of documentary evidence of his lying 
and cheating.
 

 Yes, Trump did make a big (for him) donation to the Clinton Foundation--more 
than $100,000.
 

 
 

 Oooopsie...
 

 

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

 Yeah... She's a liar and a crook. She actually makes Nixon look like a saint.
 Trump blew smoke up every politicians ass that he wanted something from. 
Wonder if he made any donations to The Clinton Foundation.

 He knows the games politicians play.
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Hillary is not a liar or a crook. Trump is both.
 

 It's hard to believe the amount of utter horse manure the right wing has 
dumped on Hillary. Even harder to believe the chumps swallow it right down and 
smack their lips.
 

 You're aware that when Hillary was secretary of state, Trump praised her 
repeatedly, right? Said she was doing a terrific job.
 

 

 

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

 
 Pretty close feste37. The fact is that about 66% of the country believes and 
has believed for years now, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. 
Hillary is a continuation of the current direction the country is headed in.
 Evangelicals will vote for Trump *not* because he's a man and that  women 
should be submissive to men but because Hillary is another leftist liberal, a 
liar and a crook. She's been in government, public service, for nearly thirty 
years and what has she accomplished? The *reset Button* stopped a missile 
defense shield for Europe,got Georgia invaded, and the Crimea taken from the 
Ukraine and other parts of the Ukraine were lost to the Russians as well as 
well as Russian involvement in protecting Assad from Obama's *red line*. She 
threw Mubarak under the bus, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control 
of Egypt, increasing it's involvement in Radical Terrorism. Libya was a 
disaster and now a den of vipers. Weapons given to rebels now associated with 
ISIS. Lost the fragile peace in Iraq and now we have the biggest surge in 
refugees the world has seen poring into Europe and she wants to invite 600,000 
o

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Right, one corrupt former agent whom the rest of the service repudiates. 

 You are really not doing so well, Mike. Your attempted comebacks are getting 
weaker and weaker.
 

 You know how psittacines regurgitate their food when they get a crop 
infection? The regurgitated material is a disgusting slimy mass.
 

 Same with parroted slime from the right wing. It's truly repulsive and a 
symptom of serious illness.
 

 

 

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

 
 Oh yes, the Secret Service is especially fond of looking out for her!
 
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 
   That's only in public. Just about without exception, everyone who has worked 
with her (including Republicans) says she's warm and caring and funny and 
charming and exceptionally likeable.
 

 

 

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

 She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.
 
 


 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

 
   

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.







 















 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Oh yes, the Secret Service is especially fond of looking out for her!


  From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
   
    That's only in public. Just about without exception, everyone who has 
worked with her (including Republicans) says she's warm and caring and funny 
and charming and exceptionally likeable.


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

She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.


  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 


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




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
(snip)There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and 
that’s if she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence 
and experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why 
anyone would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.
Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image.
Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.


  #yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021 -- #yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp #yiv4475494021hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp #yiv4475494021ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp .yiv4475494021ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp .yiv4475494021ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021ygrp-mkp .yiv4475494021ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv4475494021ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021ygrp-sponsor #yiv4475494021ygrp-lc #yiv4475494021hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021ygrp-sponsor #yiv4475494021ygrp-lc .yiv4475494021ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv4475494021
 #yiv4475494021activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv4475494021 
#yiv4475494021activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv4475494021 #yiv4475494021activity span 
.yiv4475494021underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv4475494021 
.yiv4475494021attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv4475494021 .yiv4475494021attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 .yiv4475494021attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv4475494021 .yiv4475494021attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv4475494021 .yiv4475494021attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv4475494021 .yiv4475494021bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv4475494021 
.yiv4475494021bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 dd.yiv4475494021last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4475494021 dd.yiv4475494021last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4475494021 
dd.yiv4475494021last p span.yiv4475494021yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv4475494021 div.yiv4475494021attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4475494021 div.yiv4475494021attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv4475494021 div.yiv4475494021file-title a, #yiv4475494021 
div.yiv447

[FairfieldLife] Trump May Have Already Committed an Impeacheable Crime

[jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

According to a Utah Law professor.
 

 Law Professor Says Trump Has Already Committed Impeachable Offenses 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/law-professor-says-trump-already-142022815.html 
 
 https://www.yahoo.com/news/law-professor-says-trump-already-142022815.html 
 
 Law Professor Says Trump Has Already Committed I... 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/law-professor-says-trump-already-142022815.html A 
new legal analysis from a professor at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney 
College of Law says Donald Trump may have already committed impeachable o...
 
 
 
 View on www.yahoo.com 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/law-professor-says-trump-already-142022815.html 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 

 

 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Kuurma-naaDii and nervus vagus!

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

M stopped talking much about it publicly at points when faced with an 
intellectual skepticism about these energy centers:  ‘Thin lines of energy 
flowing in the central nervous system? ’ Where exactly?   Comparing to the 
science then at that time growing on 'consciousness' defined by meditation then 
to also describe and defend a subtle system which science has yet to be able to 
even image would be daunting at best given where people and science was at in 
time.  But clearly it was where he was going in his teachings and methods even 
to his last techniques in marma, vibrational modalities and the Ved and 
Physiology practice.  The guy was a visionary, sage, empiricist and necessarily 
practical going forward. We don't have so much guidance coming out of TM about 
it other than ideas of stress release and meditation checking so people over 
the years have also gone on in their experience.  
 

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

 Yes, thanks for the reply.  I do believe that spiritual development is a 
tricky endeavor, and that complications can arise, either due to an awakening 
of kundalini, or just an expanding of awareness.  I suppose it is helpful to 
have a support network to help sort things out, and lend a helping hand if 
necessary. 

 Of course, like anything, you can carried away by too much analysis, which can 
lead to mood making and other weird diversions .  Always difficult to find the 
right balance.
 

 Still sorting that out in my own life 
 

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

 Yep, regardless of which meditation or spiritual practice some people can have 
trouble with kundalini flow (subtle energy centers) as their spirituality comes 
on or grows.  Evidently it is not by meditation necessarily but also occurs 
separately for some various people as kundalini development in the central 
subtle nervous system. Able to surface at any point as the spiritual system may 
grow, sometimes in the new spiritual aspirant or in long practiced or 
cultivated people.  This as its own continuum is different from the 
consciousness ‘awakening’ continuum that gets focused on in the TM community or 
at Rick’s batgap, but can have its own development to talk about on continuum 
different than consciousness development.
 
 In satsang around Fairfield, Iowa people can surface periodically with 
troubles in the flow of their Kundalini subtle system.  This is particularly 
different than say psychological breaks like bi-polar and such.  
 It was not something we were much guided in but there is a cohort of intuitive 
people and experienced people round who can be helpful to folks whose subtle 
systems are in rough times and not integrated enough in some ways to be easier 
with being a conduit for evidently more primordial energy referred to as 
kundalini, or the holy-ghost in x-ianity.  It can be a topic of conversation 
around Fairfield on different levels.  

 

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

 an particulars in this regard?
 

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

 In TM we did not get much guidance on this but those are interesting sutras to 
use.  
 My wife in community work as an RN, being intuitive, and being an old 
meditation teacher has been running into some people who are amidst some 
openings of kundalini. That has its spiritual reality for some people which in 
some ways is also physiologic to the human psycho-spiritual system. . 
 Card’s sequence of sutras as energy centers that are in the YS may well be 
relevant. Also it seems was where Maharishi was going with his last technique, 
the Ved and Physiology technique. The sutras like that Ved and Physiology 
process can be handy to energetically reference;  along with some kind of 
mindful intent like these kind of directives in the yoga sutras in checking of 
the flow for some people in their mists and rough with it all.  Some things 
sort of like in point 30 of the old checking notes, if you remember those. 

 Going to these YS chapters and verse are like going back to reading my tractor 
repair manual for figuring out my tractor’s ignition system that just went 
haywire. 10th cranial nerve?  Sometimes you just have to go sit and attend to 
it under a shade tree.  But figure it out also by going to an old tractor 
mechanic who has more experience with it.   
 


 

ultrarishi offers: You might be interested in the work of Stephen Porges and 
his Polyvagal Theory.
 

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

 

 "..the physiological counterpart of kuurma-naaDii might well be the vagus 
nerve, which is the main parasympathetic nerve,"

 

 In the human, who is the highest expression of God on earth, it is the vagus 
or tenth cranial nerve that is the most receptive to this solar fire or energy, 
the spiritual fire coming down, the fire of the macrocosm. This fire energizes 
humans and uses them to express the qualities of love and wisdom.
 =Charlie Lutes
 

---In Fairfiel

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[Sal Sunshine salsunshineini...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

That’s not quite how I remember it.  Sure Gore’s supposed stiffness was an 
issue, but there could have been all sorts of ways to dispense with that some 
of which he had already done.  For the debates Gore chose just about the worst 
thing he could do, looking like he was cozying up to Bush and agreeing with him 
more than disagreeing, which had the net effect of making Bush look “smart” or 
at least smarter than he was.  Here’s a couple of excerpts from Michael Moore’s 
book Stupid White Men that expresses it better than I can:

Privately, I think most people in the Nader  camp thought what I thought-that 
once Gore had a chance to wipe the floor with Bush in a debate, the election 
would be over. So we figured, let's get out millions of votes for Nader to show 
the next President--Al Gore-that there's a large number of Americans who don't 
want him pushing the Democratic Party further to the right. A strong vote for 
Nader might be a way to check Gore and his promise to do things like spend more 
on the military and less on jobs.

Yeah, we were real geniuses.

Then came the debates. Ralph was shut out of them, which left America with 
three ninety-minute shows in which Gore and Bush agreed with each other more 
than they disagreed. In the second debate, the two of them said they agreed 
with each other on thirty-seven different issues. It was stunning to watch.

Gore had blown it. He had failed to unmask Bush's ignorance and stupidity. He 
had failed to set himself apart and show the nation there was a real difference 
on the ballot. He had three chances to nuke that smirking son of a Bush, and he 
couldn't do it! Message to the country: If this is how he caves with Junior, 
what will happen when he gets in a room with the Russians? Or the Canadians!

I was shocked by the implications. It was starting to look as if Gore would 
lose. He was going to lose his home state. He was going to lose Clinton's home 
state. He couldn't convince the Democratic dean of the Senate, Robert Byrd of 
West Virginia, to endorse him until five days before the election (thus 
sacrificing West Virginia, a traditional Democratic stronghold, to Bush). Any 
one of these states would have given Gore all the electoral votes he would need 
to win the White House.
And the money shot: Then Al Gore failed to win the third and final debate with 
George W. Bush. Now where I come from, the smart guy wins in a debate; the dumb 
guy loses. It really is that simple. But not this time. I couldn't believe my 
eyes. It was clear that Al Gore was doing everything he could to lose the 
election.

That was exactly my feeling too:  it looked like he wanted to lose, and I 
couldn’t quite believe what I was seeing either.  It was almost like he was in 
some sort of trance. If Hillary attempts anything like that, I believe all is 
lost.  But hopefully she won’t.  Hopefully she’ll dispense with any and all 
doubts bout whatever by being the best Democratic candidate she can be, not by 
trying to do everything she can to lose.   We’ll find out soon.

Sal 




On Sep 21, 2016, at 10:07 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
 wrote:


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , 
 wrote :
(snip)

There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.


Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image.

Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Clinton leads in fundraising over Trump

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

And Hillary for the status-quo is in this country's best interests?  How 
are things at your brokerage these days? :-D


Both candidates suck but then America sucks and has been going downhill 
for 30 years.


On 09/21/2016 08:56 AM, olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:


Noise aside, people don't spend money on a loser. Even the Koch 
Brothers won't fund Trump or give him access to their political 
machine. Everywhere, people are steadily concluding that Don the Con 
is not in this country's best interests, and opening their wallets for 
Clinton instead.


http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-clinton-campaign-playbook-20160920-snap-story.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

That's only in public. Just about without exception, everyone who has worked 
with her (including Republicans) says she's warm and caring and funny and 
charming and exceptionally likeable. 

 

 

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

 She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.
 
 


 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 
   

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.







 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Well put. 

 It may also be a good idea to remind folks that there's no official winner or 
loser in these debates! (No, you didn't suggest that, but people often talk as 
if there were.) The MSM is pretty uniformly against Trump (Faux News aside), 
and I worry that they'll lean over backward after the debate to compensate for 
their bias and be "fair" to Trump. But they ain't fond of Hillary either, so 
goodness only knows how that'll work out.
 

 

 

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

 
 The Bush-Gore comparison is very apt. If you read the transcripts of those 
debates, it's obvious that Gore won. Bush didn't know anything. But people 
thought Bush "won" because he came across as a regular guy. Which of course is 
ridiculous. 

I won't watch the debate live. It's a bit like an upcoming soccer match in 
which you desperately want your team to win but fear they won't. It's better 
not to watch. Trump is extremely skilled at articulating what many ordinary 
people think regarding everything from terrorism to government corruption, 
whereas Hillary is highly skilled at using carefully nuanced political language 
that can sometimes sound opaque. I suspect that like Bush, Trump will lose the 
debate by any normal standards but perhaps a sizeable number of people will 
think he won it. 
 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Yep, independent, experienced, strong minded women are often seen as "bitches" 
by many men and even a few women. It is a double standard, perpetuated by a 
bunch of momma's boys, who call themselves 'principled' and 'tough' when 
demonstrating the same values. Time to change that tune, and let's all grow up. 
Hillary in November! What is so likable about the golf caddy for President? I 
find him exceptionally offensive and ignorant.Dumb as a post too.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.
 
 


 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
 
 
   

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.







 


 

[FairfieldLife] Clinton leads in fundraising over Trump

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Noise aside, people don't spend money on a loser. Even the Koch Brothers won't 
fund Trump or give him access to their political machine. Everywhere, people 
are steadily concluding that Don the Con is not in this country's best 
interests, and opening their wallets for Clinton instead. 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-clinton-campaign-playbook-20160920-snap-story.html
 
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-clinton-campaign-playbook-20160920-snap-story.html
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[feste37]

The Bush-Gore comparison is very apt. If you read the transcripts of those 
debates, it's obvious that Gore won. Bush didn't know anything. But people 
thought Bush "won" because he came across as a regular guy. Which of course is 
ridiculous. 

I won't watch the debate live. It's a bit like an upcoming soccer match in 
which you desperately want your team to win but fear they won't. It's better 
not to watch. Trump is extremely skilled at articulating what many ordinary 
people think regarding everything from terrorism to government corruption, 
whereas Hillary is highly skilled at using carefully nuanced political language 
that can sometimes sound opaque. I suspect that like Bush, Trump will lose the 
debate by any normal standards but perhaps a sizeable number of people will 
think he won it. 
 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

She has to look *likeable*, which she is not. That's like asking nurse Ratchet 
to look and act likeable.


  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 10:28 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good
   
    


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




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
(snip)There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and 
that’s if she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence 
and experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why 
anyone would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.
Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image.
Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.
  #yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622 -- #yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp #yiv7943559622hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp #yiv7943559622ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp .yiv7943559622ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp .yiv7943559622ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622ygrp-mkp .yiv7943559622ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv7943559622ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622ygrp-sponsor #yiv7943559622ygrp-lc #yiv7943559622hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622ygrp-sponsor #yiv7943559622ygrp-lc .yiv7943559622ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv7943559622
 #yiv7943559622activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv7943559622 
#yiv7943559622activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv7943559622 #yiv7943559622activity span 
.yiv7943559622underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7943559622 
.yiv7943559622attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv7943559622 .yiv7943559622attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 .yiv7943559622attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv7943559622 .yiv7943559622attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv7943559622 .yiv7943559622attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv7943559622 .yiv7943559622bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv7943559622 
.yiv7943559622bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 dd.yiv7943559622last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7943559622 dd.yiv7943559622last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7943559622 
dd.yiv7943559622last p span.yiv7943559622yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622file-title a, #yiv7943559622 
div.yiv7943559622file-title a:active, #yiv7943559622 
div.yiv7943559622file-title a:hover, #yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622photo-title a, 
#yiv7943559622 div.yiv7943559622photo-title a:active, #yiv7943559622 
div.yiv7943559622photo-title a:hover, #yiv7943559622 
div.yiv7943559622photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7943559622 
div#yiv7943559622ygrp-mlmsg #yiv7943559622ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv7943559622yshort

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

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

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.
 

 At this point I think all the debates are striving to do is capture the 
approval and votes of all of those independents and/or former Bernie supporters 
who are leaning towards Jill or Gary. The Hillary supporters are going to stay 
Hillary supporters and Trump supporters are going to keep enabling a sociopath 
no matter what happens at the debates. It would take some sort of miracle for 
Trump's base to abandon him. It will be very interesting to see what happens 
and how the polls are effected after the debate based on performance. That 
should give us a hint as to how important the debates are and how many 
undecideds there actually are/were out there pre-debate.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

So she would have done things differently had he been critical? No, he was 
paying a complement, whether it was sincere or not, to keep in good favor of 
someone who could affect his business opportunities.
That's just a good business practice. People pat Obama on the back all the time 
that really hate his guts, just to stay on his good side.But you want a 
president that is irresponsible with classified information, deletes 33, 000 
e-mails that had been subpoenaed by congress and lies about it.

  From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
   
    So he cared more about his business interests than he did about the safety 
and well-being of the American people, right?
And that's what we want in a president?


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

He'snow saying that when she was secretary of state, she was so awful ather job 
that the terrorists were emboldened. So back when he was, as yousay, blowing 
smoke up her ass, he was doing so and saying she was doinga great job even 
though he really believed she was emboldeningterrorists?

 Yes, exactly!  He wasn't in politics. He was a businessman doing business. He 
does the same with Putin.
  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
 
 Nope, not a liar, not a crook. If you had any ability to think critically, 
you'd realize that all the various stories of her supposed malfeasance are only 
insinuations. They've never come up with any smoking guns, ever, from the Rose 
Law Firm and Whitewater all the way through Benghazi and the emails and the 
Clinton Foundation.
With Trump, OTOH, there's reams and reams of documentary evidence of his lying 
and cheating.

Yes, Trump did make a big (for him) donation to the Clinton Foundation--more 
than $100,000.

Oooopsie...


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

Yeah... She's a liar and a crook. She actually makes Nixon look like a 
saint.Trump blew smoke up every politicians ass that he wanted something from. 
Wonder if he made any donations to The Clinton Foundation.
He knows the games politicians play.

  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 Hillary is not a liar or a crook. Trump is both.
It's hard to believe the amount of utter horse manure the right wing has dumped 
on Hillary. Even harder to believe the chumps swallow it right down and smack 
their lips.
You're aware that when Hillary was secretary of state, Trump praised her 
repeatedly, right? Said she was doing a terrific job.


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

Pretty close feste37. The fact is that about 66% of the country believes and 
has believed for years now, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. 
Hillary is a continuation of the current direction the country is headed in.
Evangelicals will vote for Trump *not* because he's a man and that  women 
should be submissive to men but because Hillary is another leftist liberal, a 
liar and a crook. She's been in government, public service, for nearly thirty 
years and what has she accomplished? The *reset Button* stopped a missile 
defense shield for Europe,got Georgia invaded, and the Crimea taken from the 
Ukraine and other parts of the Ukraine were lost to the Russians as well as 
well as Russian involvement in protecting Assad from Obama's *red line*. She 
threw Mubarak under the bus, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control 
of Egypt, increasing it's involvement in Radical Terrorism. Libya was a 
disaster and now a den of vipers. Weapons given to rebels now associated with 
ISIS. Lost the fragile peace in Iraq and now we have the biggest surge in 
refugees the world has seen poring into Europe and she wants to invite 600,000 
of them to live here maybe even more, along with 11+million(probably closer 
to 30 million) Illegals from south of the border given legal status along with 
all the rights of citizens.She is a proponent of the New World Order hoping to 
please the rest of the world . 
Trump is a more of a nationalist, protecting our own interests first. 
Evangelicals are not under the illusion that Trump is any kind of saint. They 
just know that we, as a nation, we are at a fork in the road and going down the 
one we are on right now is unacceptable. Nothing Trump can say can compare to 
Hillary's record of failure.
  From: feste37 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:33 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 Obviously, Trump cannot win a debate against Hillary. He has neither the 
knowledge nor experience. But here is what will happen: Hilla

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :
 (snip)
 There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Gore wasn't so much trying to make Bush look smarter. Gore had been brutally 
mocked for being too wonkish and was portrayed as stiff and boring, and he was 
attempting to counter that image. 

 

 Hillary actually has a similar problem. She needs to come across as human and 
charming as well as intelligent and experienced. Not fair, but that's the way 
it is.

Re: [FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[Sal Sunshine salsunshineini...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

On Sep 21, 2016, at 8:48 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
 wrote:


I don't know about the rest of you but I am very nervous to watch the first 
debate.

(Raising hand)  I also feel that no matter how prepared Hillary is (and she 
will be beautifully prepared), the media will find a way to let him “win.”  The 
bar is set so low, that if he even barely tries to answer the questions, he’ll 
look “presidential.”  If he doesn’t try, they’ll present him as some fun-loving 
oaf you would want to have a beer with.  Heads, Trump wins; tails, Hillary 
loses.

 While I am confident Hillary will be prepared and battle ready I know how hard 
it is to try and compete with a total and utterly annoying troll in the name of 
common sense and real dialogue. 

Robert Reich had an excellent idea:  after she’s finished laying out some 
policy proposal, turn to Trump and ask what his ideas are.  That would be at 
least one way to expose how utterly bankrupt (npi) his “ideas” are. Chances are 
pretty good he’ll go off on some ludicrous tangent that has nothing to do with 
anything.  While that may not sway his most hard-core supporters, there’s still 
plenty of swing voters out there.

I can only hope that the moderator will do his job and that Trump will simply 
come off looking like the oafish and clueless boor he is. I still may have to 
watch it after the fact, once I know Hillary has wiped the floor with him (God 
willing), but I may be able to tune it in at different moments live (for short 
spurts) out of sheer curiosity. Like watching a horror show through your 
splayed fingers. But on a bright note:
/ 
<>www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/the-two-states-that-almost-always-predict-which-candidate-is-headed-for-defeat/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
 

There’s really only one way Hillary could lose this debate IMO, and that’s if 
she pulls a Gore and tried to play down her own massive intelligence and 
experience in an attempt  to make Trump look smarter than he is.   Why anyone 
would do that is of course the big question, which I’m sure still leaves 
psychologists scratching their heads about Gore and his first debate to this 
day.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

So he cared more about his business interests than he did about the safety and 
well-being of the American people, right? 

 And that's what we want in a president?
 

 

 

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

 
 He's now saying that when she was secretary of state, she was so awful at her 
job that the terrorists were emboldened. So back when he was, as you say, 
blowing smoke up her ass, he was doing so and saying she was doing a great job 
even though he really believed she was emboldening terrorists?
 

  Yes, exactly!  He wasn't in politics. He was a businessman doing business. He 
does the same with Putin.


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
 
 
   Nope, not a liar, not a crook. If you had any ability to think critically, 
you'd realize that all the various stories of her supposed malfeasance are only 
insinuations. They've never come up with any smoking guns, ever, from the Rose 
Law Firm and Whitewater all the way through Benghazi and the emails and the 
Clinton Foundation.
 

 With Trump, OTOH, there's reams and reams of documentary evidence of his lying 
and cheating.
 

 Yes, Trump did make a big (for him) donation to the Clinton Foundation--more 
than $100,000.
 

 
 

 Oooopsie...
 

 

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

 Yeah... She's a liar and a crook. She actually makes Nixon look like a saint.
 Trump blew smoke up every politicians ass that he wanted something from. 
Wonder if he made any donations to The Clinton Foundation.

 He knows the games politicians play.
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Hillary is not a liar or a crook. Trump is both.
 

 It's hard to believe the amount of utter horse manure the right wing has 
dumped on Hillary. Even harder to believe the chumps swallow it right down and 
smack their lips.
 

 You're aware that when Hillary was secretary of state, Trump praised her 
repeatedly, right? Said she was doing a terrific job.
 

 

 

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

 
 Pretty close feste37. The fact is that about 66% of the country believes and 
has believed for years now, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. 
Hillary is a continuation of the current direction the country is headed in.
 Evangelicals will vote for Trump *not* because he's a man and that  women 
should be submissive to men but because Hillary is another leftist liberal, a 
liar and a crook. She's been in government, public service, for nearly thirty 
years and what has she accomplished? The *reset Button* stopped a missile 
defense shield for Europe,got Georgia invaded, and the Crimea taken from the 
Ukraine and other parts of the Ukraine were lost to the Russians as well as 
well as Russian involvement in protecting Assad from Obama's *red line*. She 
threw Mubarak under the bus, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control 
of Egypt, increasing it's involvement in Radical Terrorism. Libya was a 
disaster and now a den of vipers. Weapons given to rebels now associated with 
ISIS. Lost the fragile peace in Iraq and now we have the biggest surge in 
refugees the world has seen poring into Europe and she wants to invite 600,000 
of them to live here maybe even more, along with 11+million(probably closer 
to 30 million) Illegals from south of the border given legal status along with 
all the rights of citizens.
 She is a proponent of the New World Order hoping to please the rest of the 
world . 
 Trump is a more of a nationalist, protecting our own interests first. 
Evangelicals are not under the illusion that Trump is any kind of saint. They 
just know that we, as a nation, we are at a fork in the road and going down the 
one we are on right now is unacceptable. Nothing Trump can say can compare to 
Hillary's record of failure.


 From: feste37 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:33 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Obviously, Trump cannot win a debate against Hillary. He has neither the 
knowledge nor experience. But here is what will happen: Hillary will win the 
debate but Trump—surprise, surprise—will continue his uptick in the polls. Not 
by much, but it will be there. There will also be a growth in the number of 
"secret Trumpists," that is, people who plan to vote for Trump but will not 
admit it. This could give Trump a bigger margin of victory on Election Day. 
Ultimately, America will prefer a man to a woman. That's what it comes down to, 
I think. The evangelicals in particular will vote for Trump, not because they 
think he is a shining example of anything they profess to admire, but because 
St. Paul thinks that men should rule over women. 

As you c

[FairfieldLife] Re: It's Looking Good

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Same with me. I'll most likely not watch live either. Hillary has got Trump 
beat in so many ways, but he has tremendous natural expertise in crushing an 
opponent and swaying an audience. Unless she's at the very top of her game--as 
she was during the 11-hour Benghazi hearing--she may not come off all that 
well. And God only knows whether the moderators will be able to handle things 
to keep them fair. 

 WaPo is nervous too!
 

 

 

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

 I don't know about the rest of you but I am very nervous to watch the first 
debate. While I am confident Hillary will be prepared and battle ready I know 
how hard it is to try and compete with a total and utterly annoying troll in 
the name of common sense and real dialogue. I can only hope that the moderator 
will do his job and that Trump will simply come off looking like the oafish and 
clueless boor he is. I still may have to watch it after the fact, once I know 
Hillary has wiped the floor with him (God willing), but I may be able to tune 
it in at different moments live (for short spurts) out of sheer curiosity. Like 
watching a horror show through your splayed fingers. But on a bright note:
 
/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/the-two-states-that-almost-always-predict-which-candidate-is-headed-for-defeat/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

He's now saying that when she was secretary of state, she was so awful at her 
job that the terrorists were emboldened. So back when he was, as you say, 
blowing smoke up her ass, he was doing so and saying she was doing a great job 
even though he really believed she was emboldening terrorists?

 Yes, exactly!  He wasn't in politics. He was a businessman doing business. He 
does the same with Putin.
  From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
   
    Nope, not a liar, not a crook. If you had any ability to think critically, 
you'd realize that all the various stories of her supposed malfeasance are only 
insinuations. They've never come up with any smoking guns, ever, from the Rose 
Law Firm and Whitewater all the way through Benghazi and the emails and the 
Clinton Foundation.
With Trump, OTOH, there's reams and reams of documentary evidence of his lying 
and cheating.

Yes, Trump did make a big (for him) donation to the Clinton Foundation--more 
than $100,000.

Oooopsie...


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

Yeah... She's a liar and a crook. She actually makes Nixon look like a 
saint.Trump blew smoke up every politicians ass that he wanted something from. 
Wonder if he made any donations to The Clinton Foundation.
He knows the games politicians play.

  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
 
 Hillary is not a liar or a crook. Trump is both.
It's hard to believe the amount of utter horse manure the right wing has dumped 
on Hillary. Even harder to believe the chumps swallow it right down and smack 
their lips.
You're aware that when Hillary was secretary of state, Trump praised her 
repeatedly, right? Said she was doing a terrific job.


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

Pretty close feste37. The fact is that about 66% of the country believes and 
has believed for years now, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. 
Hillary is a continuation of the current direction the country is headed in.
Evangelicals will vote for Trump *not* because he's a man and that  women 
should be submissive to men but because Hillary is another leftist liberal, a 
liar and a crook. She's been in government, public service, for nearly thirty 
years and what has she accomplished? The *reset Button* stopped a missile 
defense shield for Europe,got Georgia invaded, and the Crimea taken from the 
Ukraine and other parts of the Ukraine were lost to the Russians as well as 
well as Russian involvement in protecting Assad from Obama's *red line*. She 
threw Mubarak under the bus, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control 
of Egypt, increasing it's involvement in Radical Terrorism. Libya was a 
disaster and now a den of vipers. Weapons given to rebels now associated with 
ISIS. Lost the fragile peace in Iraq and now we have the biggest surge in 
refugees the world has seen poring into Europe and she wants to invite 600,000 
of them to live here maybe even more, along with 11+million(probably closer 
to 30 million) Illegals from south of the border given legal status along with 
all the rights of citizens.She is a proponent of the New World Order hoping to 
please the rest of the world . 
Trump is a more of a nationalist, protecting our own interests first. 
Evangelicals are not under the illusion that Trump is any kind of saint. They 
just know that we, as a nation, we are at a fork in the road and going down the 
one we are on right now is unacceptable. Nothing Trump can say can compare to 
Hillary's record of failure.
  From: feste37 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:33 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 Obviously, Trump cannot win a debate against Hillary. He has neither the 
knowledge nor experience. But here is what will happen: Hillary will win the 
debate but Trump—surprise, surprise—will continue his uptick in the polls. Not 
by much, but it will be there. There will also be a growth in the number of 
"secret Trumpists," that is, people who plan to vote for Trump but will not 
admit it. This could give Trump a bigger margin of victory on Election Day. 
Ultimately, America will prefer a man to a woman. That's what it comes down to, 
I think. The evangelicals in particular will vote for Trump, not because they 
think he is a shining example of anything they profess to admire, but because 
St. Paul thinks that men should rule over women. 

As you can see, my Trump Anxiety is growing by the day. This is a virus that is 
affecting liberals all over the country, and it is contagious. I was just on 
the phone to a friend in another small town in Iowa (not Fairfield) and 
explained my beliefs about how the election would

[FairfieldLife] It's Looking Good

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I don't know about the rest of you but I am very nervous to watch the first 
debate. While I am confident Hillary will be prepared and battle ready I know 
how hard it is to try and compete with a total and utterly annoying troll in 
the name of common sense and real dialogue. I can only hope that the moderator 
will do his job and that Trump will simply come off looking like the oafish and 
clueless boor he is. I still may have to watch it after the fact, once I know 
Hillary has wiped the floor with him (God willing), but I may be able to tune 
it in at different moments live (for short spurts) out of sheer curiosity. Like 
watching a horror show through your splayed fingers. But on a bright note:
 
/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/the-two-states-that-almost-always-predict-which-candidate-is-headed-for-defeat/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na

Re: [FairfieldLife] The case against Donald Trump

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Do you read what I write? I never said anything about "defining Christianity." 

 I don't care who defines Christianity, nor how they define it. For the third 
time: I'm saying if being Christian means becoming a person like you, I'm not 
interested.
 

 Tell me if there are any words you don't understand.
 

 Let me try it another way; maybe it'll be clearer:
 

 If Christ approves of people like you, I don't approve of Christ.
 

 

 

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

 
 Christ defines Christianity, not me nor you.
 
Well... the Pope is a socialist, so even the most devout Christian can be an 
asshole.

 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:32 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The case against Donald Trump
 
 
   I'm just saying, if being a Christian means becoming like you, I'm not 
interested.
 

 That isn't a knock on Christianity, though. I know a bunch of devout 
Christians who are some of the best people I've ever met.
 

 

 

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

 
 So when does your book come out , the one defining *Christianity*?
 Have to be careful though. Jesus said some really unkind things about the 
pharisees and even took a rope and whipped people doing commerce in the Temple.
 But He spoke the truth, even though it wasn't always *kind*.

 
 Sal suggested Trump voters are illiterate. I suggested that it's far more 
likely that the majority of the  less educated that will vote, come from 
Democratic strong holds such as ghettos, barrios and inner cities, most likely 
already controlled by Democrats for the past five or six decades or even 
longer. A lot of good it has done them. What's the old saying, the definition 
of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a 
different result each time. No, they just stay the same or get worse.


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 4:28 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The case against Donald Trump

 
   Will that "truth" make me free to be the kind of person you have become?
 

 No, thanks.
 

 

 

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

 
 The truth will set you free.
 
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 5:11 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The case against Donald Trump

 
   Such a fine Christian man you are.
 

 /s
 

 

 

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

 
 NO the ghetto is still supporting Clinton. They do as they're told.
 
 


 From: "Sal Sunshine salsunshineiniowa@... [FairfieldLife]" 

 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 10:10 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The case against Donald Trump

 
   The problem is that people who are planning to vote for Trump do not read, 
period.  They probably never leaned how.
 
 Sal 
 

 




On Sep 19, 2016, at 9:21 AM, feste37 mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
 

The problem is that people who are planning to vote for Trump do not read 
articles such as these. The New York Times and the Washington Post have done an 
excellent job in exposing Trump for who he is—their columnists have produced 
hundreds of articles denouncing him, day after day, week after week, a nonstop 
assault since he became a serious contender for the presidency. But it has had 
zero effect. How many Trump supporters read the Times or the Post? Five? Ten? 
Twenty? 
 

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

 
 

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

 
 

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

 Well written, and factual.

http://theweek.com/articles/648712/case-against-donald-trump 
http://theweek.com/articles/648712/case-against-donald-trump
 

 Very much worth the read. I know/realize all this and more - the man is a 
complete menace to all decency and what we hold dear in this country, in our 
lives. What is maddening is when you get these idiot radicals blowing up things 
in the US or abroad and it becomes instant fodder for Trump to spew more of his 
"I told you so" and "Only I can keep you safe from the Muslim threat". This is 
not good timing and I curse these terrorist imbeciles every time they do 
something because it only furthers Trumps rhetoric in the eyes of the gullible, 
shallow-thinking supporters he seems to draw to himself.
 

 

 See, already this is happening. A no-brainer to predict.
 http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/19/politics/trump-responds-to-nyc-and-nj-bombings/ 
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/19/politics/trump-responds-to-nyc-and-nj-bombings/









 






 


 













 














 















 


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Kuurma-naaDii and nervus vagus!

[steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Yes, thanks for the reply.  I do believe that spiritual development is a tricky 
endeavor, and that complications can arise, either due to an awakening of 
kundalini, or just an expanding of awareness.  I suppose it is helpful to have 
a support network to help sort things out, and lend a helping hand if 
necessary. 

 Of course, like anything, you can carried away by too much analysis, which can 
lead to mood making and other weird diversions .  Always difficult to find the 
right balance.
 

 Still sorting that out in my own life 
 

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

 Yep, regardless of which meditation or spiritual practice some people can have 
trouble with kundalini flow (subtle energy centers) as their spirituality comes 
on or grows.  Evidently it is not by meditation necessarily but also occurs 
separately for some various people as kundalini development in the central 
subtle nervous system. Able to surface at any point as the spiritual system may 
grow, sometimes in the new spiritual aspirant or in long practiced or 
cultivated people.  This as its own continuum is different from the 
consciousness ‘awakening’ continuum that gets focused on in the TM community or 
at Rick’s batgap, but can have its own development to talk about on continuum 
different than consciousness development.
 
 In satsang around Fairfield, Iowa people can surface periodically with 
troubles in the flow of their Kundalini subtle system.  This is particularly 
different than say psychological breaks like bi-polar and such.  
 It was not something we were much guided in but there is a cohort of intuitive 
people and experienced people round who can be helpful to folks whose subtle 
systems are in rough times and not integrated enough in some ways to be easier 
with being a conduit for evidently more primordial energy referred to as 
kundalini, or the holy-ghost in x-ianity.  It can be a topic of conversation 
around Fairfield on different levels.  

 

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

 an particulars in this regard?
 

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

 In TM we did not get much guidance on this but those are interesting sutras to 
use.  
 My wife in community work as an RN, being intuitive, and being an old 
meditation teacher has been running into some people who are amidst some 
openings of kundalini. That has its spiritual reality for some people which in 
some ways is also physiologic to the human psycho-spiritual system. . 
 Card’s sequence of sutras as energy centers that are in the YS may well be 
relevant. Also it seems was where Maharishi was going with his last technique, 
the Ved and Physiology technique. The sutras like that Ved and Physiology 
process can be handy to energetically reference;  along with some kind of 
mindful intent like these kind of directives in the yoga sutras in checking of 
the flow for some people in their mists and rough with it all.  Some things 
sort of like in point 30 of the old checking notes, if you remember those. 

 Going to these YS chapters and verse are like going back to reading my tractor 
repair manual for figuring out my tractor’s ignition system that just went 
haywire. 10th cranial nerve?  Sometimes you just have to go sit and attend to 
it under a shade tree.  But figure it out also by going to an old tractor 
mechanic who has more experience with it.   
 


 

ultrarishi offers: You might be interested in the work of Stephen Porges and 
his Polyvagal Theory.
 

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

 

 "..the physiological counterpart of kuurma-naaDii might well be the vagus 
nerve, which is the main parasympathetic nerve,"

 

 In the human, who is the highest expression of God on earth, it is the vagus 
or tenth cranial nerve that is the most receptive to this solar fire or energy, 
the spiritual fire coming down, the fire of the macrocosm. This fire energizes 
humans and uses them to express the qualities of love and wisdom.
 =Charlie Lutes
 

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

 

 Number 5, at least in my set (English: BT?), is the one that seems to 
correspond YS III 31:
 

 kuurma-naaDyaaM* sthairyam.
 

 Some translations:
 

 kUrmanaaDyaaM sthairyam
 [HA]: 
Calmness Is Attained By Samyama On The Bronchial Tube.
 [IT]: (32):
 (By performing Samyama) on the Kurma-nadi steadiness.
 [VH]: 
On the tortoise duct (tortoise), steadiness.
 [BM]: 
From perfect discipline of the “tortoise vein,” one’s being becomes steady.
 [SS]: (32):
 By samyama on the kurma nadi (a subtle tortoise-shaped tube located below the 
throat), motionless in the meditative posture is achieved.
 [SP]: 
(32) By making samyama on the tube within the chest, one acquires absolute 
motionlessness.
 [SV]: (32):
 
 On the nerve called Kurma (comes) fixity of the body.
 -
 I used to think that the "oiling" of joints, less tight muscles and harder 
*rections after doing siddhis was mainly due to flying, but now it seems