[FairfieldLife] Republicanism As Religion

[do.rflex]

Republicanism As Religion

by Andrew Sullivan - The Daily Beast, 12 Sep 2011


   The Dish covered
  the remarkable web essay of Mike Lofgren
 , but I didn't comment myself because it  so closely
follows my own argument in "The Conservative Soul
 " and on
this blog, that it felt  somewhat superfluous. But I want to draw
attention to the crux of the  piece, because if we are to understand how
the right became so unmoored  from prudence, moderation and tradition
and became so infatuated with  recklessness, extremism and revolution,
we need to understand how it  happened.
It is, of course, as my shrink never fails to point out, 
multi-determined. But here is Lofgren's attempt at a Rosebud:
How did the whole toxic stew of GOP beliefs -  economic royalism, 
militarism and culture wars cum fundamentalism - come  completely to 
displace an erstwhile civilized Eisenhower Republicanism?

It is my view that the rise of politicized  religious fundamentalism 
(which is a subset of the decline of rational  problem solving in 
America) may have been the key ingredient of the  takeover of the 
Republican Party. For politicized religion provides a  substrate of 
beliefs that rationalizes - at least in the minds of  followers - all 
three of the GOP's main tenets.

That too is my view: that the GOP, deep down, is behaving as a 
religious movement, not as a political party, and a radical religious 
movement at that.


Lofgren sees the "Prosperity Gospel" as a divine  blessing for personal
enrichment and minimal taxation (yes, that kind of  Gospel is compatible
with Rand, just not compatible with the actual  Gospels); for military
power (with a major emphasis on the punitive,  interventionist God of
the Old Testament); and for radical change and  contempt for existing
institutions (as a product of End-Times thinking, intensified after 9/11
 ).

Lofgren argues that supply-side economics attaches to the 
fundamentalist worldview purely by coalition necessity.


The  fundamentalists are not that interested in debt or economics (they
sure  didn't give a damn as spending exploded under Bush) but if their 
coalition partners insist on a certain economic doctrine, they'll easily
go along with it, as long as it is never compromised.


If it's presented  as eternal dogma, they can handle it - and defend it
with gusto.


If it  also means that Obama is wrong, so much the better.


Most theo-political  movements need an anti-Christ of some sort; and
Obama - even though he  is the most demonstrably Christian president
since Carter - fills the  role.
And so this political deadlock conceals a religious war at its heart.
Why after all should one abandon or compromise sacred truths?

And for  those whose Christianity can only be sustained by denial of
modern  complexity, of scientific knowledge, and of what scholarly
studies of the Bible's origins have revealed, this fusion of political
and spiritual lives into one seamless  sensibility and culture, is
irresistible.

And public reminders of  modernity - that, say, many Americans do not
celebrate Christmas, that  gay people have human needs, that America
will soon be a  majority-minority country and China will overtake the US
in GDP by  mid-century - are terribly threatening.

But all these nuances do not therefore vanish. The gays  don't
disappear. China keeps growing. The population becomes browner and 
browner. Women's lives increasingly become individual choices not 
social fates. And this enrages and terrifies the fundamentalist even 
more. Hence the occasional physical lashing out - think Breivik or 
McVeigh - but more profoundly, the constant endless insatiable cultural 
lashing out at the "elites" who have left fundamentalism behind, and 
have, on many core issues, science on their side.

So within this  religious core, and fundamentalist mindset, you also
have the steely  solder of ressentiment, intensified even further by a
period of  white middle and working class decline and economic crisis.
That's how I explain the current GOP.


It can only think in doctrines,  because the alternative is living in a
complicated, global, modern  world they both do not understand and also
despise.


Taxes are therefore always  bad. Government is never good. Foreign
enemies must be pre-emptively  attacked. Islam is not a religion.
Climate change is an elite  conspiracy to impoverish America. Terror
suspects are terrorists. When  Americans torture, it is not torture.
When Christians murder, they are  not Christians.


And if you change your mind on any of these issues, you  are a liberal,
an apostate, and will be attacked.
If your view of conservatism is one rooted in an instinctual, but 
ag

[FairfieldLife] More than twice as many blame Republicans for what's wrong in Washington

[do.rflex]

Americans are more than twice as likely to blame Republicans
for Washington's infighting, a new Bloomberg Poll finds.

45 percent blame Republicans, 20 percent blame President Obama,
and 19 percent blame congressional Democrats for "what's gone wrong
in Washington."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/181699-poll-voters-blame-gop-more-for-washingtons-political-fighting-

[FairfieldLife] 30 gifts to 30 strangers in Sydney

[do.rflex]

For a smile...

Watch here: 
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/09/12/video-mid-day-distraction-30-gifts-30-strangers/

[FairfieldLife] A Quote for Labor Day from Abraham Lincoln

[do.rflex]

"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only
the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not
first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much
the higher consideration."

~~   Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican president, who offered
those words in his annual message to Congress in 1861 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is FFL's 10th Birthday

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> I had meant to invite some of the old-timers back for a visit. LB Shriver,
> Thom Krystofiak, Off World Beings (did invite him), Rudra Joe/Kirk
> Bernhardt. Can you think of others?
>


Your efforts, including your interviews, are very much appreciated, Rick.

[FairfieldLife] All the Pretty Little Horses - by Odetta

[do.rflex]

According to Living Documents in American History from Earliest Colonial Times 
to the Civil War, edited by John A Scott, (Trident Press 1963), this beautiful 
song was collected by Alan Lomax, who learned it from his mother, who took it 
from North Carolina to Texas after the Civil War.

This simple, lovely version is by Odetta Holmes,(December 31, 1930 – December 
2, 2008). 

All the Pretty Little Horses - by Odetta
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7QXidR_Aks

[FairfieldLife] Radha: The Feminine Nature of God

[do.rflex]

Radha: The Feminine Nature of God Gadadhara Pandit Dasa

  Hindu Chaplain, Columbia University  and New York University

   Millions will gather today, in India and   around the world, to
offer
prayers, worship, and devotional songs glorifying the appearance  
of the
Divine mother, Radha (Radharani)  .
Radha descended from the   spiritual realm
shortly after Krishna
 , approximately 5,000   years ago. She took
birth in the
small village known as Barsana, which is about 28 miles from  
Mathura,
the birth place of Krishna.
The word Radha comes from the Sanskrit verbal root radh, which
means
to worship, and the word rani, which means queen. Radharani can
be literally
translated to mean "the queen of worship." In some texts, she is
described as
"the supreme goddess who is worshipable by everyone.


She is the protector of all, and she is the mother of the entire
universe."

The answer to the question that has been on everyone's mind for
millennia is,
YES and NO. The question is: Is God a Man? God is not just male,
and
according to some Vedic scriptures, God has both masculine and
feminine
expansions.


In the Bhagavad Gita  , Krishna provides
a sneak preview into these feminine
traits.
"Among women I am fame, fortune, fine speech, memory,
intelligence,
steadfastness and patience."
However, in some of the more esoteric texts such as the Puranas
  and the
Chaitanya-Caritamrita
 , it explains
that the complete manifestation of God
includes his feminine counterpart, Radha. They are inconceivably
one and
different, as Krishna expanded himself into two for the purpose
of exchanging love.


There's a beautiful description in the Chaitanya-Caritamrita
which gives us
a window into the connection between Radha and Krishna.
"Radha is the full power, and Lord Kṛṣṇa is the
possessor of full power.
The two are not different, as evidenced by the revealed
scriptures.
They are indeed the same, just as musk and its scent are
inseparable,
or as fire and its heat are non-different. Thus Rādhā and
Kṛiṣhṇa are one,
yet they have taken two forms to enjoy the mellows of pastimes."
This concept is not an easy one to grasp. If God is full and
complete, why does he
need to expand himself to exchange love? The next question we
can ask is why
does God need to do anything? God has a personality which
indicates that he has
preferences. Perhaps this need to expand for the purpose of
exchanging love speaks
of the importance love plays in the lives of all individuals.

Our desire to love and be loved comes from God. For the most
part, no one wants
to be alone, at least not permanently. The thing everyone is
chasing after is love.
We all want to know that there are people out there that love
us. Simultaneously,
we hanker to be able to give our love to others.

There is another passage in the Caitanya-Caritamrita that
describes Radha's qualities and love for Krishna.
"Radharani's body, mind, and words are steeped in love for
Krishna ...
The body of Radharani is a veritable transformation of love of
Godhead.
Even Krishna can't understand the strength of Radha's love which
overwhelms Him. Her transcendental body is complete with unparalleled
spiritual qualities. Even Lord Kṛiṣhṇa Himself cannot
reach the limit of the transcendental qualities of Radharani."
These are some of Radha's prominent qualities:

1. Radha is adolescent and always freshly youthful.
2. Radharani is very sweet and most charming to look at.
3. Radha's face is smiling and ever blissful.
4. Radharani is the most exceptional singer and veena
  player.
5. Radha's words are charming and pleasing.
6. Radha is exceptionally humble.
7. Radha is the embodiment of mercy and compassion.
8. Radha possesses Mahabhava, the highest sentiment of love.
9. Radha always keeps Krishna under Her control. Krishna
submissively obeys Radha's command

These topics of divine and spiritual love between Radha and
Krishna will always
remain a mystery as long as we remain on the material platform.
Love on the
spiritual platform is devoid of selfishness. The needs and
interests on the other
take precedence over one's own needs. The kind of love that
comes closest to
spiritual love is the love exhibited by a mother towards her
child. It's full of sacrifice
and is completely selfless; it is without expectation.

The feeling of love is derived from the 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Why Obama will be Pres. again'...(Power & Temptation)

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert  wrote:
>
> From my understanding of 'Why' Barack Obama is and will be President again:
> Is Because:
> He is a 'moderatiing force' in the time of 'great turmoil' , that we are 
> experiencing on all levels with the coming of the year: 2012, and the end of 
> the Mayan Calender, signifying the end of an old time, and the beginning of a 
> 'New Time'...
> In the new time, time will begin to be experienced as proposed in 'Einstein's 
> Theory of Relativity'...that of being 'Flexible'...
> The inner field of the light of consciousness will be more readily available 
> to the 'World dPopulation'...
> This means as 'Time' is experienced in it's relativity, more and more people 
> will be encouraged to 'Follow their Heart' , or 'Follow their Bliss' as we 
> see more of  the younger generation, fulfilling their hearts and souls this 
> way, around the world, and further, the younger ones are establishing, in 
> their hearts: Less prejudice in general to people different from them, but 
> rather a curiousity about people from different cultures, backrounds and 
> eithnic  values...
> As more and more of the 'Old Way' is being exhibited for it's 'Egoic 
> Prejudiced Values'...only striving to preserve the 'Hoarded Wealth of the 
> Rich'...
> We begin to see the 'Temptation of Power' and how it is used to as it were,
> "Keep societies stuck, while only the most wealthy, proper"...
> This way is coming to an end soon, and because President Obama is the one 
> with the most love for his family and his nation,  and because he is the one 
> who(partly because he grew up in Hawaii), that has the 'Balanced Temperment' 
> and intelligence...will be elected again...
> He has avoided most of the temptations which come with the gaining of 
> 'Worldly Power'...
> So, in conclusion, we can see why the Republicans are having so much trouble 
> finding someone to face off with President Obama...
> J.G.D.
>  


I just sent a post on Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, who 
appears to be the only sane and really electable GOP presidential candidate. 
But I don't think anyone will beat Obama in 2012.

[FairfieldLife] Huntsman 2.0 - Could Huntsman save the day for the GOP?

[do.rflex]

Huntsman 2.0   Thomas Lane | Talking Points Memo | August 21, 2011
"Poll after poll shows that
despite President Obama's sinking numbers
he still fares well against
virtually all his major GOP opponents."


-- What do you make of the new hard-hittin',  tough-tweetin' Jon
Huntsman
 ? We ran a piece
   on Friday
asking whether the former Utah governor and Obama-appointed  ambassador
to China was even trying to win the nomination any more.  Since then
numerous emails have come in from readers who think he's  making a long
play for the nomination in 2016.
That's certainly a reasonable view. However, it's possible there's 
something else at work here, too.

The Republican establishment is faced with something of a quandary 
right now. Even just a few months ago, the big money and major 
power-brokers thought 2012 was going to be unwinnable. It was widely 
believed that the economy would slowly pick up, and by November of next 
year President Obama would be able to take the credit for that and walk 
to re-election.

This likely prompted the more credible GOP candidates, such as New 
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, to decide to sit out the coming election and
wait for 2016. By and large the GOP establishment seemed happy enough 
to send out the political equivalent of cannon-fodder that would be torn
apart in the No Man's Land of 2012.

However, the sudden threat of a double-dip recession means this 
election suddenly looks winnable for the Republicans... But only if they
have the right candidate. Poll
   after poll
   shows that despite President Obama's sinking
numbers he still fares  well against virtually all his major GOP
opponents.

Presumably this is maddening for the Republican establishment. All of  a
sudden what they need is a moderate savior who's not tarnished by 
either extreme flip-flopping or by outrageous statements against, say,
the  Federal Reserve
  and the  scientific process
 . Hence the current
conservative calls in  some quarters
  for Rep. Paul Ryan and the brief  flutter earlier this week
over rumors of a Christie run
 .

This must be infuriating for Huntsman; as far as he must be  concerned,
the party already has its moderate savior and he's already in  the race.
Indeed, it's him.

But the problem Huntsman faces is exactly that he is already in the 
race. Unlike Christie or Ryan there are now real polls for Huntsman, and
they show him failing to catch alight.

If he was entering the fray right now he'd figuratively be wearing a 
halo and would be suffused by a glowing ethereal light while angels 
flutter around him, plucking away at harps.

But the nature of the nominating process meant that in order to get a 
viable campaign on the ground, he had to enter a few months ago, before 
there was this great GOP thirst for a candidate just like him. Having 
gotten in at that stage, now the numbers are in as well, and the 
power-brokers can dismiss him while casting their eyes around for a 
candidate whose halo has not been tarnished by the grime of poor poll 
numbers.

That could well be the significance behind this new combative  Huntsman;
he's indicating to the types of people pining after Christie  or Ryan --
and lamenting that they don't have much time to set up a  campaign on
the ground -- that there is already an Independent-friendly  candidate
right under their noses. These new moves are intended to  reboot his
campaign into Huntsman 2.0. At the very least it should  guarantee he at
least gets asked some proper questions in the next GOP  debate. It's a
tough strategy as it does indeed involve alienating the  Tea
Party-leaning sections of the base. But right now it seems the only 
strategy that's left.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/08/huntsman_20.php?ref=fpblg

[FairfieldLife] Teabaggers more disliked than Muslims, atheists

[do.rflex]

Teabaggers more disliked than Muslims, atheists   by  John Aravosis (DC)
on 8/17/2011 10:45:00 AM



In America, it takes a lot to be more disliked than a Muslim, or  even,
God forbid, an atheist.  From  the NYT
 :

[I]n data we have recently collected, the Tea Party  ranks lower than
any of the 23 other groups we asked about — lower than  both
Republicans and Democrats. It is even less popular than much  maligned
groups like "atheists" and "Muslims." Interestingly, one
group  that approaches it in unpopularity is the Christian Right.And 
here's a surprise - the Tea Party is actually conservative Republicans.
Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party's "origin story." 
Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political 
neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party's supporters today were highly 
partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more 
likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past
Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party 
support today.
And the other factor that defines Teabaggers is the desire to see 
religion (their religion) play a prominent role in the politics.
Next to being a Republican, the strongest predictor of being  a Tea
Party supporter today was a desire, back in 2006, to see religion  play
a prominent role in politics.  Interestingly, and  surprisingly I'd
argue, the public has swung against mixing religion  with politics.
While over the last five years Americans have become  slightly more
conservative economically, they have swung even further in  opposition
to mingling religion and politics. It thus makes sense  that the Tea
Party ranks alongside the Christian Right in unpopularity.This  is quite
interesting.  We'd need more details as to what's motivating  people to
be less interested in religion in the public square, but it  might
provide a nice line of attack for Democrats, if they have the  courage
to take on religion, even batty  religions like Bachmann's and Perry's
 .  More on Perry's fringe  religious beliefs here
 .

http://www.americablog.com/2011/08/teabaggers-more-disliked-than-muslims\
.html

[FairfieldLife] The Tea Party’s March of Folly: Idiocracy, Here We Come

[do.rflex]

The Tea Party's March of Folly: Idiocracy, Here We Come

Jon Ponder | Aug. 19, 2011

"And it was no accident
that Republican fatcat operatives
recognized these dumbasses
as suckers whom they could
easily dupe into believing
that it was the government,
not big business,
that caused the financial collapse in 2008;
that tax cuts create jobs;
that corporations are people;
and on and on —

"or that a mild-mannered
DLC centrist Democratic president
who happens to be black
is actually a terrifying Kenyan
anti-colonialist Marxist
Muslim Nazi fascist illegal alien"

"Maybe it's naive to think that ideological opponents can be
brought together by a common fear of mass stupidity: Call
it idiocraphobia."


-- In her Los Angeles Times column on Thursday, Meghan Daum made note of
the rise references in political commentary to the movie "Idiocracy," a 
2006 burp-and-fart, sci-fi political comedy set 500 years in the future,
written and directed by Mike Judge, the creator of the animated series 
"Beavis and Butthead" and "King of the Hill":

 References to the film seem to be everywhere, and not just in
 op-eds penned by cranky columnists... The latest issue of the
 Economist has an article about the business-sabotaging effects of
 the battles in Washington, headlined "American Idiocracy."

 A recent blog post on the Psychology Today website was headlined
 "Idiocracy: Can We Reverse It?" Meanwhile, it's popping up in
 causal conversations, Internet comments and, most notably, on
 Twitter, where it often appears as a hashtagged topic…

Daum suggests that the movie has been given a second life...


Watch 'Idiocracy' Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=clYwX8Z43zg



Daum's hope is that interest in "Idiocracy" and the shock
of recognition of that society is being driven toward the future
it predicts will give pause to partisans on both sides and bring
them to their senses.

"Maybe it's naive," she writes, "to think that ideological
opponents can be brought together by a common fear of mass
stupidity: Call it idiocraphobia."

But, see, the problem here is not naivete. The problem with
this analysis is a reflexive reliance among media types on
the equivalency meme: both sides are equally guilty, equally
bad. A pox on both your houses...

It wasn't "Congress" that behaved like stubborn toddlers. It
wasn't Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and
their caucuses who seized control of the debt-ceiling debate and
drove the United States' full faith and credit toward the brink
of default.

Objectively, this stubborn behavior was only found among one
discrete faction: The radical know-nothing tea partyists.

There is no equivalency between any group on the left or in the
middle and the tea party.

No one else is so pliably dim-witted, so unmoored from reality
that they take it as faith that Jesus rode dinosaurs and the earth
is just 7,000 years old.

Based on the flimsiest tissues of obvious bogus-ness, they
convinced themselves that Pres. Obama, a mild-mannered DLC
centrist Democrat is in reality a terrifying Kenyan anti-
colonialist Marxist Muslim Nazi fascist illegal alien.

It is not surprising that Republican fatcat operatives have had
no trouble duping the tea partyists into believing that, for
example, it was the government, not big business, that caused
the financial collapse in 2008. That tax cuts create jobs,
and corporations are people.

It is these people, the tea partyists — not Democrats,
liberals, independents or even moderate Republicans — who are
the idiocrats among us...

Continue reading here:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/08/19/tea-partys-march-of-folly-idiocr\
acy-here-we-come/

[FairfieldLife] Yes, But the Rich Are Different

[do.rflex]

Yes, But the Rich Are Different…

by Anne Laurie

Earlier this week, the Guardian reprinted a piece by Naomi "Shock 
Doctrine
 " Klein on
"Looting  with the Lights On
 ":


 ... Argentina, circa 2001. The economy was in freefall and
 thousands of people living in rough neighbourhoods (which had been
 thriving manufacturing zones before the neoliberal era) stormed
 foreign-owned superstores. They came out pushing shopping carts
 overflowing with the goods they could no longer afford –
clothes,
 electronics, meat.

 The government called a "state of siege" to restore order;
the
 people didn't like that and overthrew the government.

 Argentina's mass looting was called el saqueo – the sacking.

 That was politically significant because it was the very same word
 used to describe what that country's elites had done by selling
off
 the country's national assets in flagrantly corrupt
privatisation
 deals, hiding their money offshore, then passing on the bill to the
 people with a brutal austerity package.

 Argentines understood that the saqueo of the shopping centres would
 not have happened without the bigger saqueo of the country, and
 that the real gangsters were the ones in charge.

 But England is not Latin America, and its riots are not political,
 or so we keep hearing. They are just about lawless kids taking
 advantage of a situation to take what isn't theirs. And British
 society, Cameron tells us, abhors that kind of behaviour.

 This is said in all seriousness. As if the massive bank bailouts
 never happened, followed by the defiant record bonuses. Followed by
 the emergency G8 and G20 meetings, when the leaders decided,
 collectively, not to do anything to punish the bankers for any of
 this, nor to do anything serious to prevent a similar crisis from
 happening again.

 Instead they would all go home to their respective countries and
 force sacrifices on the most vulnerable.

 They would do this by firing public sector workers, scapegoating
 teachers, closing libraries, upping tuition fees, rolling back
 union contracts, creating rush privatisations of public assets and
 decreasing pensions – mix the cocktail for where you live.

 And who is on television lecturing about the need to give up these
 "entitlements"? The bankers and hedge-fund managers, of
course.

 This is the global saqueo, a time of great taking. Fuelled by a
 pathological sense of entitlement, this looting has all been done
 with the lights on, as if there was nothing at all to hide.

 There are some nagging fears, however. In early July, the Wall
 Street Journal, citing a new poll, reported that 94% of
 millionaires were afraid of "violence in the streets". This,
it
 turns out, was a reasonable fear…

Until I skimmed the Guardian comments, I hadn't realized  that the
Bullingdon  Club   was
still in existence… or that Prime Minister Cameron and  London Mayor
Boris Johnson had been BC members during their youth.  They were 
careless people  ...

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/08/20/yes-but-the-rich-are-different/

[FairfieldLife] Rick Perry defends Texas' Abstinence Programs

[do.rflex]

Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngiJhmoFKkw 

[FairfieldLife] Dave Brubeck's 'Take Five' on Sitar by Sachal Music

[do.rflex]

Brubeck's famous 'Take Five' played on a sitar with accompaniment
is awesome.

Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLF46JKkCNg 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A lot of that going around lately...
> > > > > 
> > > > > We can hardly blame poor do.rk ...
> > > > 
> > > > Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy."
> > > 
> > > You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you
> > > had a few good years left.
> > 
> > Go fuck yourself, Judy.
> 
> Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up
> the needle and putting it down again in a different
> groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player;
> sometimes that works.
>


You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you 
appreciate the results.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A lot of that going around lately...
> > > 
> > > We can hardly blame poor do.rk ...
> > 
> > Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy."
> 
> You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you
> had a few good years left.
>


Go fuck yourself, Judy.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Sounds delightful, Rory.
> >
> * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but 
> once my "I" got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, 
> it ran only two seasons...
>


Is the 2009 movie the same thing? I'm not sure I want to take the time to watch 
29 episodes of the TV series.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A lot of that going around lately...
> > > 
> > > We can hardly blame poor do.rk ...
> > 
> > 
> > Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy."
> 
> 
> * * Are you really daid like me? Then we are indeed ever fucking ourself 
> again and again. We really are an infinitely flexing dork, aren't we? "You're 
> a bore' becomes the (n)ever-boring Uroboros.
> 
> By the way, somewhat along the same lines, I heartily second Tom Traynor's 
> recommendation of "Dead Like Me" (available by instant download from Netflix) 
> for a poignant and hilarious look at a life immediately post-Awakening :-)
>


Sounds delightful, Rory.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Can I predict things, or can I predict things?  :-)
> 
> Yup, your dittohead the do.rk ...

Like I said...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > A lot of that going around lately...
> 
> We can hardly blame poor do.rk ...


Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy."

[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > 

> No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather
> than the actual article.

Go fuck yourself, Judy.

[FairfieldLife] Polling Suggests Tea Party/GOP Could Lose House

[do.rflex]

Public Policy Polling: Independent voters gave the tea party control
of the U.S. House in 2010.

Now 68 percent of independents disapprove of House Republicans.


Tom Jensen, Public Policy Polling:

 I think most national pundits continue to be missing the boat on
 how possible it is that Democrats will retake control of the House
 next year.

 We find Democrats with a 7 point lead on the generic Congressional
 ballot this week at 47-40. After getting demolished with
 independent voters last year, they now hold a slight 39-36
 advantage with them. And in another contrast to 2010 Democratic
 voters are actually slightly more unified than Republicans, with 83
 percent committed to supporting the party's Congressional
 candidates compared to 80 percent in line with theirs.

 This poll is certainly not an outlier. We have looked at the
 generic ballot 11 times going back to the beginning of March and
 Democrats have been ahead every single time, by an average margin
 of about 4 points.

 This 7 point advantage is the largest Democrats have had and if
 there was an election today I'm thinking that they'd take
back the
 House…

 There's little doubt that Democrats are winning the fallout of
the
 debt debate.

 Approval for Congressional Republicans has now plunged to a 25/65
 spread. That's a 21 point decline on the margin from when they
 started the year at 33/52.

 Last year independent voters were the driving factor behind the GOP
 retaking the House majority. Now they give it a 20/68 approval
 rating.

 It's early — but it looks very plausible that we could be
back to
 Speaker Pelosi 17 months from now.


GALLUP: Gallup's first measure of the 2012 congressional elections
shows Democrats leading Republicans, 51% to 44%, in registered
voters' preferences for which party's candidate they would support
in their district "if the elections for Congress were being held today."

See GALLUP GRAPH:
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Produc\
tion/Cms/POLL/mcaf4abaleymmsl13eq7aw.gif



Andrew Sullivan:

 My money is on a Democratic House and a chastened Republican Senate
 in 2013 …

 My reason for the shift: the staggering recklessness of
 the GOP in recent months. It goes hand in hand with Obama's
 turn-around against a generic Republican.

Except that GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell the pro-failure caucus
he leads are incapable of being "chastened," so I'm not sure
what
Sully means by that.

Links here:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/08/13/polls-suggest-tea-party-could-lo\
se-house/

[FairfieldLife] Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama

[do.rflex]

A new CNN/Opinion Research poll finds President Obama's base is behind him with 
70% of Democrats saying they'd like to see Obama as their party's presidential 
nominee next year.

Notes pollster Keating Holland: "In 1994, only 57% of Democrats wanted the 
party to renominate Bill Clinton, and he went on to win the nomination and a 
second term two years later." 

Linked here:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/08/14/democratic_base_solidly_behind_obama.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: The next president of the US has just thrown his hat into the ring

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans 
wrote:
>
> The right-wing christian conservatives are on the move


No doubt about it:


This Week in God

By Steve Benen

  First up from the God Machine this week is a look at the  religious
associations of Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R), whose burgeoning 
presidential campaign makes his extremist  allies
  that much more significant well outside the Lone
Star State.
Right Wing Watch ran  a report
  this week on the religious leaders Perry chooses to pal  around
with, as evidenced by last week's Christian prayer rally —
called  "The Response" — and its radical co-sponsors like
the American Family  Association and Family Research Council.
A major chunk of [last week's event] was given over to  Mike Bickle,
who runs the International House of Prayer (IHOP) movement,  which
recruits young people into "radical" devotion to prayer and 
fasting.


Yes, he's the guy who said  
 that Oprah is paving the way for the
Antichrist.


Bickle's associate  Lou  Engle 
 has
organized a series of stadium events  
 pushing prayer, fasting, and politics under the banner of "The 
Call," which provided the model for "The Response."


Bickle and Engle are  hard-core dominionists who believe they are
ushering in a new Christian  church which will take its rightful place
of dominion over every aspect  of government and society. […]

And lest anyone think that Perry's religious agenda is limited to 
social issues, he made clear that a rigid conservative economic agenda 
was central to his spiritual mission. […]

Perry used the event to let right-wing religious voters and churches 
nationwide know that for those who see politics as spiritual warfare, he
is the warrior they have been waiting for.

For more along these lines, the Texas Observer had a  very interesting
piece
 
last month — "Rick Perry's Army of God" —  about a
group of radical Christian leaders with some deeply strange  ideas about
government and their ties to the governor of Texas.

If you thought Jeremiah Wright made for interesting campaign fodder  in
2008, Perry's faith-based associations offer even more 
eyebrow-raising opportunities.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/this_week_in_g\
od_14031510.php


>
> --- On Sat, 8/13/11, Tom Pall thomas.pall@... wrote:
>
> From: Tom Pall thomas.pall@...
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] The next president of the US has just thrown
his hat into the ring
> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, August 13, 2011, 11:00 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   What a winning ticket.   A Texan and an Alaskan. 
Now we're going to get things rolling again.   Leadership and
assassination insurance all in one ticket.
>

[FairfieldLife] Kentucky Gives 75% Tax Break To Creationist Theme Park

[do.rflex]

Kentucky Gives Creationist Theme Park 75 Percent Tax Discount For The 
Next 30 Years


"The multi-million dollar tax breaks
for the amusement park
come at a time when
Kentucky families are struggling
from *eight rounds* of state budget cuts
over the past three years.
That includes cuts to education
at all levels, a pay freeze
for all teachers and state workers,
and reduced funding for Medicaid."


-- In May, Kentucky approved a $43 million tax break for
Ark Encounter, a Bible-themed amusement park that
religious organizations are building outside Williamstown.

Now the state is giving the creationist project another kickback in
the form of a 75 percent property tax discount over the next 30 years:

 Mayor Rick Skinner said the offer is laid out in a memorandum of
 agreement that will be followed by a formal tax-increment financing
 deal with Petersburg-based Ark Encounters LLC in coming months.

 The tax deal is in addition to almost $200,000 given to the company
 by Grant County's economic development arm as an enticement to
keep
 the project located there, along with 100 acres of reduced-price
 land.

 And that's not counting the state's promise of $40 million
worth of
 sales tax rebates and a possible $11 million in improvements to the
 interstate near the project that would be financed by the Kentucky
 Transportation Cabinet.

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that "the array of state and
local incentives worry some people, who aren't sure they will pay
off in the end."

That group includes local officials like City Council member and
former Mayor Glenn Caldwell who worries that residents might
"be burdened with additional costs because of this project."

Proponents of the project, including Gov. Steve Beshear (D) say it
will create up to 900 jobs and attract 1.6 million tourists in
its first year. However, as TPM notes, "those numbers were based on
a feasibility study, commissioned by Ark Encounters LLC, that
state officials reportedly never actually saw."

The multiple tax breaks for the amusement park come at a time when 
Kentucky families are struggling from eight rounds of state budget cuts 
over the past three years. That includes cuts to education at all 
levels, a pay freeze for all teachers and state workers, and reduced 
funding for Medicaid.

The state already has a Creationism Museum, and the complementary 
amusement park includes biblical exhibits like the Tower of Babel and a 
full-size replica of Noah's Ark…complete with dinosaurs inside
(which  creationists believe co-existed with early man). It's slated
to open in  the spring of 2014.

Links here:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/10/292379/kentucky-gives-creat\
ionist-theme-park-75-percent-tax-discount-for-the-next-30-years/

[FairfieldLife] What Rich Republicans Don't Understand

[do.rflex]

"It's not just income
disparity that's a problem.

"Consider how this all started.

"A bunch of smart people
set up a kind of scam
using complex financial instruments
that no one can understand.
They got rich beyond all imagination,
while the rest of us lost our jobs,
lost our retirement money,
lost, in some cases, our homes.

"And then we were told that
there was no money for our cops,
no money for our firefighters,
our nurses, our teachers.

"And next we'll be told
that our Social Security check
will be smaller and we'll have to wait
another year or two
to get our Medicare.

"Meanwhile, the rich,
represented ably by the Republicans,
refuse to pay one dime in extra taxes."


-- Over in England, the elites are debating the causes of the
widespread looting and property destruction that has been
spreading throughout the country like a wildfire.

Roving packs of young people from the underclass are breaking
into high-end stores and taking whatever they want. They're
robbing people in broad daylight with no concern that most of
their actions are being captured by the ubiquitous cameras that
film nearly every square-inch of England's cities. They're
lighting cars and shops ablaze and then attacking the firefighters
and police with projectiles.

We know the spark that lit the match was the shooting death of a
black man in the Tottenham section of North London, but that
doesn't explain why people are rioting in South London and
Nottingham and Birmingham and Manchester, and even in Glouchester.
It's hard to come up with one single answer.

First of all, the same thing has been happening right here
in Philadelphia all year long. It's just on a smaller scale. For
example, this is from late June.

 UPPER DARBY — A mob of about 40 people stormed into the Sears
 department store on 69th Street Thursday, and in a flash stole
 thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, officials said.

 Police were able to round up 15 juveniles and one adult, 19, all
 from West Philadelphia.

 "They came in on the El train and hit Sears," police
Superintendent
 Michael Chitwood said. "They stole sneakers, socks, watches,
 whatever they could get their hands on, and left."

I think these girls in England [links below] have as good
an explanation as you're going to find. Having looted alcohol from
a local shop, they calmly explained to a BBC reporter that the
riots were all about showing the rich, the government, and the
police that they could do whatever they want.

When asked why they were destroying their own community, they said
they were attacking the shop owners and people with money. And
they thought the whole enterprise was a great deal of fun.

Sometimes people say that there is no real left-wing in America,
and that's kind of true in Britain, too. But we *do* have a
left-wing. It's just a left-wing designed to kill the seductive
power of communism and to build a bulwark against anarchism.


Different countries chose different ways of responding to the
economic catastrophes of the 1920's and 1930's. The Russians
became totalitarian. Europe succumbed to fascism. We chose a
New Deal.

It was a middle road. It provided a safety net and tolerable
working conditions. It created a huge middle class. It didn't
arouse the far right or far left instincts of the nation, but put
them into sleep mode.

Now we're back to 1920's level of income disparity. Conservatives
are attacking every aspect of the New Deal.

What rich people seem to be forgetting is that the opposite of the
New Deal is not some idyllic paradise of free-market bliss.
The opposite is rampaging mobs who light shit on fire just to show
you that they can do whatever they want. Eventually, that can
include burning down your business or your house, or, maybe,
even taking your life.

And it's not just income disparity that's a problem.

Consider how this all started.

A bunch of smart people set up a kind of scam using complex
financial instruments that no one can understand. They got rich
beyond all imagination, while the rest of us lost our jobs, lost
our retirement money, lost, in some cases, our homes.

And then we were told that there was no money for our cops, no
money for our firefighters, our nurses, our teachers.

And next we'll be told that our Social Security check will be
smaller and we'll have to wait another year or two to get our
Medicare.

Meanwhile, the rich, represented ably by the Republicans, refuse to
pay one dime in extra taxes.

With that kind of attitude and that lack of accountability, it's
not hard to see why some people might start losing hope and might
start losing respect for "the system."

If the rich don't wise up quick, the scenes from England will be
coming to America. Bet on it.

Links included here:
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2011/8/10/114513/417

[FairfieldLife] Re: GOP Has Highest Disapproval Rating 20 Years

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall  wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:24 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:18 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "GOP's Disapproval,Rating Hits 59 Percent
> > > > which is the highest disapproval rating
> > > > in the CNN poll in the last twenty years"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > But our wannabe president's ratings have fallen to levels he's never
> > seen.
> > > And it ain't over till the fat lady sings.
> > >
> >
> >
> > I don't think Obama's assuming anything ...but the line-up of his potential
> > opponents is pretty pathetic.
> >
> >
> I suggest that Obama's health is not good and he will not survive to be
> re-elected.
>


Bananas.

[FairfieldLife] Re: GOP Has Highest Disapproval Rating 20 Years

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall  wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:18 PM, do.rflex  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "GOP's Disapproval,Rating Hits 59 Percent
> > which is the highest disapproval rating
> > in the CNN poll in the last twenty years"
> >
> >
> >
> But our wannabe president's ratings have fallen to levels he's never seen.
> And it ain't over till the fat lady sings.
>


I don't think Obama's assuming anything ...but the line-up of his potential 
opponents is pretty pathetic.

Here's a quote from TIME's Joe Klein:

"This is my 10th presidential campaign, Lord help me. I have
never before seen such a bunch of vile, desperate-to-please,
shameless, embarrassing losers coagulated under a single
party's banner.

"They are the most compelling argument I've seen against
American exceptionalism...

"There are those who say, cynically, if this is the dim-witted
freak show the Republicans want to present in 2012, so be it.
I disagree. One of them could get elected. You never know."

-- Joe Klein, TIME: 
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/03/29/american-embarrassment/

AND, while it's way too soon to make any solid predictions,,,

- Obama Surges To Lead Against Generic Republican -

-- Beset by debt ceiling woes, President Obama has been trailing behind a 
hypothetical "generic Republican" in recent polls. But no longer! The latest 
from Gallup has him moving into a solid lead. 

According to the monthly survey, which was conducted from August 4 -7, Obama 
would win 45-39 against "the Republican party's candidate." The previous two 
polls from Gallup had the generic GOPer running strong with a 47-39 lead in 
July and 44-39 lead in June.

Despite widespread anger at Washington over the last month's debt ceiling 
negotiations and a week of brutal financial news, several polls this week have 
suggested that Obama and the Democratic brand are hanging tough for now. 

A look at Obama's approval ratings across all 50 states released on Monday 
showed him gaining ground in a number of critical states since the Democrats' 
disastrous midterm election. 

A CNN poll on Tuesday showed the Republican party more unpopular than ever in 
the wake of the debt ceiling fight while Democrats are holding steady.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/obama-surges-to-lead-against-generic-republican.php?ref=fpb

[FairfieldLife] GOP Has Highest Disapproval Rating 20 Years

[do.rflex]

"GOP's Disapproval,Rating Hits 59 Percent
which is the highest disapproval rating
in the CNN poll in the last twenty years"


--  New data from a CNN poll shows that there's been a difference
in the minds of many Americans: the Democratic Party is getting a
split on approval/disapproval at 47 - 47, but the Republican
Party disapproval rating is all the way up to 59%, against a
33% approval.

The GOP approval rating has been going down in the CNN poll since
their 2010 victories: in the October 27-30 version, the
Republican Party had a small plurality in approval, at 44 - 43.

But since last fall's election they've seen a steady downward trend
in the survey, to the current low, which is the highest
disapproval rating in the CNN poll in the last twenty years.

The Tea Party itself actually has a lower disapproval rating at
51% than the Republican Party, and only a slightly lower
approval rating at 31%.

CNN was also quick to point out possible consequences of such
high dissatisfaction with Congress.

>From the report:

 Only 41 percent of people questioned say the lawmaker in their
 district in the U.S. House of Representatives deserves to be
 re-elected - the first time ever in CNN polling that that figure
 has dropped below 50 percent.

 Forty-nine percent say their representative doesn't deserve to be
 re-elected in 2012. And with ten percent unsure, it's the first
 time that a majority has indicated that they would boot their
 representative out of office if they had the chance today.

Links here:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/cnn-poll-grand-old-party-down\
grade.php

[FairfieldLife] Re: Dolly Parton, Emmylou Harris Linda Ronstadt - After the Goldrush

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > On Letterman - A wonderful song by Emmylou Harris, Dolly Parton 
> > and Linda Ronstadt, beautiful version.
> > 
> > After the Goldrush - written by Neil Young
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iifrf35cEv8
> 
> I love this song, and their version of it, but only 
> knew it before from the album the three of them did
> together. I got the feeling from listening to it that
> these three women really loved each other, and felt
> as if they had discovered in each other kindred souls,
> and more important, kindred voices.
>


It's one of those songs that has stayed with me personally, long
after I heard it the first time performed by Neil Young. Yes, a magnificently 
beautiful song all around.


Here's the original: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e3m_T-NMOs

>From After The Gold Rush (1970)
-
AFTER THE GOLD RUSH

Well, I dreamed I saw the knights
In armor coming,
Saying something about a queen.
There were peasants singing and
Drummers drumming
And the archer split the tree.
There was a fanfare blowing
To the sun
That was floating on the breeze.
Look at Mother Nature on the run
In the nineteen seventies.
Look at Mother Nature on the run
In the nineteen seventies.

I was lying in a burned out basement
With the full moon in my eyes.
I was hoping for replacement
When the sun burst thru the sky.
There was a band playing in my head
And I felt like getting high.
I was thinking about what a
Friend had said
I was hoping it was a lie.
Thinking about what a
Friend had said
I was hoping it was a lie.

Well, I dreamed I saw the silver
Space ships flying
In the yellow haze of the sun,
There were children crying
And colors flying
All around the chosen ones.
All in a dream, all in a dream
The loading had begun.
They were flying Mother Nature's
Silver seed to a new home in the sun.
Flying Mother Nature's
Silver seed to a new home.

[FairfieldLife] Dolly Parton, Emmylou Harris Linda Ronstadt - After the Goldrush

[do.rflex]

On Letterman - A wonderful song by Emmylou Harris, Dolly Parton and Linda 
Ronstadt, beautiful version.

After the Goldrush - written by Neil Young

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iifrf35cEv8

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Post Count Follies :-)

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> This was during my time.  I was skin boy, I was driving, M was shotgun.  I 
> can't imagine Charlie being one of the people in the back seat.  Did Charlie 
> say it was in Germany?  
>


Your memory appears to be faulty, Mark. Charlie told us that story himself and 
it's in the book "MAHARISHI, THE GURU the Story of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi  by 
MARTIN, EDITOR EBON" (Paperback - 1968).

Here's Barry Wright refering to it on alt.meditation.transcendental in 2004:

"It was a paperback with Maharishi on a white cover standing probably circa 
late sixties (1968?).  I know it had the tale of them trying to catch the ferry 
in BC.  Even in the 70's I think I found it at a used book store.

"It is "Maharishi, the Guru" Edited by Martin Ebon.  And yes it is a collection 
of interviews and stories from various meditators.  I was thinking it was still 
not the book when I picked it up and opened a page.  That page was they very 
page I was talking about with Charlie describing the wild drive to the ferry in 
the northwest (page 112)." 

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.meditation.transcendental/msg/cad7584afba09960?dmode=source

The book is actually available at Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/MAHARISHI-GURU-Story-Maharishi-Mahesh/dp/B00260M63Q/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1312399513&sr=8-2








Then maybe he was.  He did come spend a little time with M a few times during 
my 5 years there, but I don't remember him being on that trip to Germany.  I 
don't remember who came, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Charlie.  Gee, maybe, 
for this group, I should stop reminiscing.  Maybe I told the story to Charlie.  
He did tell me once that I should be out chasing women.
> 
> On Aug 3, 2011, at 12:36 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > We were driving at night in Germany, late, trying to catch a ferry. I 
> > > think the world knows how punctual the Germans are about such things. As 
> > > was his wont, he would give me a little hand signal when I could speed 
> > > through a red light with impunity. (He could send his awareness out and 
> > > scope out the intersection ahead for incoming cars and/or policemen.) 
> > > When he didn't signal, I stopped for the light.
> > > 
> > > We drove on into the night as the ferry's departure time came and went, 
> > > and on we kept, I would say, for about fifteen minutes, though it may 
> > > have been less.
> > > 
> > > When we arrived at the dock, the ferry was there, with all it's lights 
> > > on. As we drove the car down the ramp I could see the captain, standing 
> > > near the ramp, with three of his crew surrounding him, looking bemused, 
> > > slightly amazed, perhaps concerned and wondering. In the next instant, 
> > > the captain came to, looked around, nodded, grunted and headed for the 
> > > pilot's cabin so the ferry could depart.
> > 
> > Charlie Lutes told this exact story almost exactly this way. Are you 
> > repeating his story, or were you in the car with him?
> > 
> > >
> > > Not on this. I saw his anger in two modes, while he was devastating 
> > > people and kicking them out, me included, so I have this experience from 
> > > the inside, and in a group when he got pissed for whatever reason. Was 
> > > anyone in the hotel in Mallorca II where he busted everyone for sharing 
> > > techniques? Mike Dixon says that bottles shattered.
> > > 
> > > All I can say is that, in the group context, it felt like he cracked the 
> > > atmosphere with the power of it. It was astonishing and exhilarating. In 
> > > the individual context, as witness, it was sickening, as recipient, it 
> > > was devastating.
> > > 
> > > But I'll give you a different kind to make up for it.
> > > 
> > > M definitely had siddhis. One thing he could do was put folks in a 
> > > trance, blank out their conscious awareness, selectively disconnect their 
> > > body from mind. He did this to me once and I came to in the middle, so I 
> > > know this from the inside as well. As below, he seemingly could do this 
> > > from a distance with nearly anyone.
> > > 
> > > We were driving at night in Germany, late, trying to catch a ferry. I 
> > > think the world knows how punctual the Germans are about such things. As 
> > > was his wont, he would give me a little hand signal when I could speed 
> > > through a red light with impunity. (He could send his awareness out and 
> > > scope out the intersection ahead for incoming cars and/or policemen.) 
> > > When he didn't signal, I stopped for the light.
> > > 
> > > We drove on into the night as the ferry's departure time came and went, 
> > > and on we kept, I would say, for about fifteen minutes, though it may 
> > > have been less.
> > > 
> > > When we arrived at the dock, the ferry was there, with all it's lights 
> > > on. As we drove the car down the ramp I could see the captain, standing 
> > > near the ramp, with three of h

[FairfieldLife] Re: Different experience of dying ignorant or enlightened

[do.rflex]

"...when you die the anguish
can be  greater than the stings
of thousands of scorpions."

~~ Guru Dev [MMY's teacher, Shankaracharya Swami Brahmananda Saraswati]


This  teaching [extended below] from Guru Dev is likely where Maharishi
got the idea that death [separation from the body upon its death] for
the 'unenlightened' is extremely painful.

While the idea is promulgated by a few in some of the the eastern
traditions, I have been unsuccessful in locating any specific
authenticated and/or generally accepted authoritative scripture that
specifically states it.

Further, in the currently extensively available near death experience
NDE research and its subsequently narrated contact with so-called dead
humans in the spirit worlds, there IS frequent mention of an afterlife
review of one's lifetime which can be painful in some respects - but no
descriptions of the pain of the actual separation from the body such as
described by Guru Dev or MMY.


Making the mistake of being worldly/transmigrated then you have to fall
again and again.
In taking birth there is suffering; much more suffering there is at the
time of dying. In the Shastras it is said that when you die the anguish
can be greater than the stings of thousands of scorpions. If one
scorpion stings it is torment to endure the pain. If thousands of
scorpions sting then guess what may be the torment of the period of
demise.
The pains of birth/death are additional to those of our lifetimes, which
are without end. Without Ishwar (God) it is impossible to become
released from this. Making the mistake of being worldly/transmigrated
then you have to fall again and again. You should argue against desires
that are impure and afterwards should have only one strong desire for
getting God. You will not progress until this desire has become stronger
than any other.
[Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita kaNa 10 of 108]

>From the:
108 Discourses of Guru Dev, Shankaracharya Swami Brahmananda Saraswati
Available here: http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
>
> >
> > RESPONSE: Transcending in TM, does it mean the actual individual
flesh and bones human being stops existing? What possible relevance does
transcending in TM have to do with dying
>
> Transcending is 'conscious' dying, though the body still retains its
vivifying principles (pranas) allowing the soul (jiva) to re-enter it.
>
> In final death the 'silver cord' is snapped, severing the portal of
prana resulting in death. In transcending the silver cord remains in
tact.
>
> St. Paul said, "I die daily", even in sleep we actually die,
temporarily (not consciously).
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Morality

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The vain and the young may attend us awhile,
> > > > But let not their flatt'ry our prudence beguile.
> > > > Let's covet those charms that shall never decay;
> > > > Nor listen to all that deceivers can say.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Burma Shave
> > >
> > 
> > Hilarious!
> >
> 
> I sigh not for beauty, nor languish for wealth, 
> But grant me, kind Providence, virtue and health.
> Then, richer than kings, and far happier than they,
> My days shall pass swiftly and sweetly away.
>


Always Look On The Bright Side of Life

Life of Brian - by MontyPython

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBiLNN1NhQ

[FairfieldLife] Re: Morality

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> >
> > The vain and the young may attend us awhile,
> > But let not their flatt'ry our prudence beguile.
> > Let's covet those charms that shall never decay;
> > Nor listen to all that deceivers can say.
> >
> 
> Burma Shave
>

Hilarious!

[FairfieldLife] Reagan aide: GOP either stupid, crazy, ignorant or cowards

[do.rflex]

VIDEO: Bruce Bartlett: Chunk of GOP either stupid, crazy, ignorant or craven 
cowards

-- Historian Bruce Bartlett, a former domestic policy adviser
to President Ronald Reagan, sat down with MSNBC's Chris Matthews
on Wednesday to discuss the national debt.

Bartlett said it was a myth that tax cuts are the key to
prosperity, noting that Reagan raised the capital gains rate. He
was also skeptical that Congress would be able to solve the
current budget crisis.

"I think at this point, there's nothing that can pass the House
of Representatives," he said.

"I think a good chunk of the Republican caucus is either stupid,
crazy, ignorant or craven cowards, who are desperately afraid of
the tea party people, and rightly so."

Bruce Bartlett explains how much of the deficit is the result of Bush unpaid 
for tax cuts, prescription drug legislation and wars.

Watch full segment here: 
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/bruce-bartlett-chunk-of-gop-either-stupid-crazy-ignorant-or-craven-cowards/
 

http://snipurl.com/trrwv   [www_rawstory_com] 

[FairfieldLife] Indian women protest sexual violence with SlutWalk

[do.rflex]

Indian women protest sexual violence with SlutWalkBy Agence
France-Presse 
Sunday, July 31st, 2011 -- 10:32 am


NEW DELHI — Hundreds of protesters took to the streets of New Delhi 
for India's first "Slut Walk" on Sunday, to protest at an alarming rise 
in sexual assault cases and the growing sense of insecurity among women.

"Slut Walks", which have become a global phenomenon to protest  against
sexual violence, see women march dressed in skimpy clothing to 
challenge the mindset that victims of sexual assault should be blamed 
for the crimes against them.

But most of the women participating in the protest in New Delhi chose 
to wear loose T-shirts and trousers, as they felt the cause was more 
important than the clothes.

"It is time for Indian women to speak out and fight for their own 
security. Indian women are not sluts and men have no right to treat us 
like one," 22-year-old student Ashima Awal told AFP.

A 2010 survey found that 85 percent of women in Delhi feared being 
harassed, and many of those at Sunday's march said being groped or 
molested was an almost daily occurrence.

"Even if we are covered from head to toe, we get molested. Men just 
need an opportunity to harass women," said Raksha Gupta, a housewife who
took part in the protest along with her husband and her in-laws.

"Groping and staring at women in public spaces is a sport in the 
national capital, several men can win gold medals here," said Uma 
Jaysingh, a student who uses public transport to travel to college.
"I take a deep breathe when I get in the bus and always keep a pepper 
spray in my bag," said Jaysingh, who believes fighting back against 
sexual assault is the only way to control it.
"Indian women have to be street smart and they cannot choose to be 
delicate darling anymore."

New Delhi now tops the chart of the most unsafe cities in India, with 
489 reported rape cases in 2010, up from 459 in 2009, according to 
police statistics.

In the 2010 survey by the Delhi government, the United Nations and 
women's rights group Jagori (Wake Up Women), 45 percent of women said 
they avoided stepping out alone after dark and 65 percent feared taking 
public transport.

A number of men joined their wives, girlfriends, daughters and nieces 
on the protest march.

"I don't want my daughter to ever deal with sexual harassment. Men  will
have tell other men to stop this crime," said Ajay Mathur, a father  of
two teenage daughters.

"I have trained my daughters to shout if someone makes a lewd  remark,"
said Mathur, who said he felt that most Indian women were often  too shy
or embarrassed to report incidents of sexual crime.

India's rapid economic growth has thrown open new job opportunities  for
women, while attitudes to pre-marital relationships and sex have  also
transformed in middle class areas of major cities.

But women seen as modern and independent complain they are viewed by 
men as "easy".

"If a woman is standing alone waiting for a cab or a bus at night,  men
will stop next to her and check her out," said Achla Sachdev, 26,  who
works for a bank.

"I hate this feeling of being unsafe and insecure in my own city."

The Slut Walk has faced opposition in India, with many viewing the 
title as provocative and distracting attention from a serious issue -- 
prompting the organisers to soften it by adding the Hindi term for 
"shamelessness" to the name.

Its full title is Slut Walk or Besharmi Morcha (shameless front).

Umang Sabharwal, the 19-year-old journalism student who organised 
Sunday's march, said the focus should be on the issue, not the name of 
the protest.

"People should oppose crime against women. There is no need to oppose 
the name, Slut Walk," she said.

Jagori worker Prabhleen, who uses only one name, told AFP last week 
that women in India do not feel free to do what they want.

"You are constantly reminded that being a woman you need to have a 
checklist with you, be careful where you are going, when you are going 
and whether you are wearing the right dress or not," she said.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/31/indian-women-protest-sexual-violen\
ce-with-slutwalk/

[FairfieldLife] Climate Change Debunked? Not So Fast

[do.rflex]

Climate Change Debunked? Not So Fast Stephanie
Pappas, LiveScience Senior Writer   Date: 28 July 2011 Time: 07:14
PM ET
  [cloud cover and climate change]
Scientists have shown that as the planet warms water  vapor, and thus
clouds, will increase, trapping even more heat. One  scientist, however,
suggests random events drive clouds, which then  drive warming.
CREDIT: Nicolle Rager  Fuller, National Science Foundation
View full size image
New research suggesting that cloud cover, not carbon dioxide, causes 
global warming is getting buzz in climate skeptic circles. But 
mainstream climate scientists dismissed the research as unrealistic and 
politically motivated.

"It is not newsworthy," Daniel Murphy, a National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) cloud researcher, wrote in an email to
LiveScience.

The study, published July 26 in the open-access online journal Remote 
Sensing, got public attention when a writer for The Heartland Institute,
a libertarian think-tank that promotes climate  change skepticism
 , wrote for Forbes magazine that the study  disproved the global
warming worries of climate  change "alarmists."
  However, mainstream climate scientists say that  the
argument advanced in the paper is neither new nor correct.


The  paper's author, University of Alabama, Huntsville researcher Roy 
Spencer, is a climate change skeptic and controversial figure within the
climate research community.



"He's taken an incorrect model, he's tweaked it to match observations, 
but the conclusions you get from that are not correct," Andrew Dessler,
a  professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, said of 
Spencer's new study.

Cloud chaos

Spencer's research hinges on the role of clouds in climate change. 
Mainstream climate researchers agree that climate change happens when 
carbon dioxide traps heat from the sun in the atmosphere, much in the 
same way that a windshield traps solar heat in a car on a sunny 
afternoon. As the planet warms, a side effect is more water vapor in the
atmosphere. This water vapor, known to most of us as clouds, traps more 
heat, creating a viscous loop. [Earth  in Balance: 7 Crucial Tipping
Points
 ]

Spencer sees it differently. He thinks that the whole cycle starts with 
the clouds. In other words, random increases in cloud cover cause 
climate warming. The cloud changes are caused by "chaos in the climate 
system," Spencer told LiveScience.

In the new paper, Spencer looked at satellite data from 2000 to 2010 to 
compare cloud cover and surface temperatures. Using a simple model, he 
linked the two, finding, he said, that clouds drive warming. His 
comparisons of his data with six Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change (IPCC) models showed, he said, that the models are too sensitive 
(meaning some variables, such as warming, increase at the slightest 
change in other factors) and that carbon dioxide is not likely to cause 
much warming at all. [Image  Gallery: Curious Clouds
 ]

Disagreements

However, no climate scientist contacted by LiveScience agreed.

The study finds a mismatch between the month-to-month variations in 
temperature and cloud cover in models versus the real world over the 
past 10 years, said Gavin Schmidt, a NASA Goddard climatologist. "What 
this mismatch is due to — data processing, errors in the data or
real  problems in the models — is completely unclear."

Other researchers pointed to flaws in Spencer's paper, including an 
"unrealistic" model placing clouds as the driver of warming and a lack 
of information about the statistical significance of the observed 
temperature changes. Statistical significance is the likelihood of 
results being real, as opposed to chance fluctuations unrelated to the 
other variables in the experiment.

"I cannot believe it got published," said Kevin Trenberth, a senior 
scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

Several researchers expressed frustration that the study was attracting 
media attention.

"If you want to do a story then write one pointing to the 
ridiculousness of people jumping onto every random press release as if 
well-established science gets dismissed on a dime," Schmidt said. 
"Climate sensitivity is not constrained by the last two decades of 
imperfect satellite data, but rather the paleoclimate  record
 ."

Spencer agreed that his work could not disprove the existence of 
manmade global warming. But he dismissed research on the ancient 
climate, calling it a "gray science."

Politics and science

The science of Spencer's work proved inextricable from the political 
debate sur

[FairfieldLife] Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hold In Global Warming Alarmism

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe"  wrote:
>
>
> And again I say: Why do these ignorant wingnut wackos believe
everything that happens to fall into their e-mail in boxes?
>
> I get this kind of crap all the time from my conservative friends and
relatives. The scary thing is that when I point out the inaccuracies and
outright falsehoods, they often really don't care whether the specific
story is true or not.
>


Late Night: Professional Climate Change Denialist Issues  Climate Change
Denying Study, Wingnuts Rejoice

By: Blue Texan   Thursday
July 28, 2011 8:00  pm
  [Tweet] Tweet
 4   
[digg] 
   [stumbleupon] 
  

  [300]





Wingnuts everywhere are excitedly  linking
  to this Forbes piece
which  FINALLY PROVES AL GORE IS FAT GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX!!


NASA satellite data from the years 2000  through 2011 show the
Earth's  atmosphere is allowing far more heat to  be released into
space than  alarmist computer models have predicted,  reports a new
study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote  Sensing.  The study
indicates far less future global warming will  occur than  United
Nations computer models have predicted, and supports  prior  studies
indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap  far less heat
than alarmists have claimed.

And who authored the study? Someone at Caltech? MIT? Cambridge?

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer,  a principal research scientist at the 
University of Alabama in  Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for
the  Advanced  Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua
satellite,  reports  that real-world data from NASA's Terra
satellite contradict  multiple  assumptions fed into alarmist computer
models.

Oh, Roy Spencer.

You know Roy Spencer  , 
don't you? He's an  unabashed creationist
  and a fellow at the  Heartland Institute
 , which is funded
by  ExxonMobil 
to promote "free market ideas." He's "The  Official
Climatologist of the Rush Limbaugh Show
 " and he says he  gets his views on science from  the
bible.
  And every few years, he issues a fatwa another paper or book
"debuking"  the myth of global warming.


Then, inevitably, three things happen: 1) there's a huge celebration
in Wingnuttia;  2)  actual scientists examine said study;
 
— and then, 3)  they promptly smack down Spencer.


Let me save you some trouble here, wingnuts. You're going to need to
do a little better than a Big Oil-funded flat-earther from the 
University of Tractor Fixin' and Bible Learnin' to override
every  major scientific society and academy on the planet.


Just trying to save you a little trouble here.
http://firedoglake.com/2011/07/28/professional-climate-change-denialist-\
issues-climate-change-denying-study-wingnuts-rejoice/




>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" rick@ wrote:
> >
> > Yes, he's an evangelical Christian who also doubts Darwin's theory
of
> > evolution. Real scientific guy.
> >
> >
> >
> > See
> >
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2008/05/22/202659/should-you-believe-anyth\
ing-
> > john-christy-or-roy-spencer-say/
> >
> >
http://www.science20.com/chatter_box/global_warming_skeptic_clouds_issue\
s
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Video: "David Wants to Fly" director interview

[do.rflex]

Amazon USA has 2 copies available:

  
   David  Wants to Fly (
David quiere volar )  [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.0  Import - Germany ]


(2  customer reviews
 )
DVD
   
1  new
  from $35.99   1 
used
  from $35.99

Here's the link:
http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&tag=mozilla-20&index=blended&link_code=q\
s&field-keywords=David%20Wants%20to%20Fly&sourceid=Mozilla-search


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Bhairitu
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 5:40 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Video: "David Wants to Fly" director
interview
>
>
>
>
>
> Rather recent and maybe someone linked to it but I don't recall seeing
> such a link:
>
http://blog.onesmallseed.tv/index.php/whats-your-story-david-sieveking/
>
> I'd be curious why a US edition of the DVD (or BD) hasn't been issued?
>
> April 13
>
> Hi Rick,
>
>
>
> I still hope for an American DVD deal and I will provide you a DVD
when we
> got it made - so far people from the US just order the German DVD I
guess -
> it has an English film version on it and is equipped with English
subtitles
> where necessary:
>
>
>
>
http://www.amazon.de/David-wants-fly-Sieveking/dp/B004265K7G/ref=sr_1_1?\
ie=U
> TF8
>
 U%0ATF8&s=dvd&qid=1287348585&sr=8-1-spell>
> &s=dvd&qid=1287348585&sr=8-1-spell
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
>
> David
>

[FairfieldLife] Quote of the Day - on Conservatism

[do.rflex]

"The story of American history is that of conservative ideas
and prejudices falling away as our society grows more progressive
and thus more true to our nation's founding ideals.

"Conservatives supported slavery, conservatives opposed women's suffrage, 
conservatives supported Jim Crow, conservatives opposed
the 40-hour work week and the abolishment of child labor,
and conservatives supported McCarthyism.

"In short, all the major advancements of freedom and justice
in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by conservatives,
no matter the party they inhabited at the time."

"Conservatism is Bill Bennett lecturing you about self-denial,
then rushing off to feed his slot habit at the casino.

"It's James Dobson telling you that children need regular beatings
to stay in line.

"It's a superannuated nun rapping you on the knuckles so you
won't think about your dirty parts.

"It's Jerry Falwell watching "Teletubbies" frame by frame to see
if Tinky Winky is trying to turn him gay.

"Conservatism is everyone you never wanted to grow up to be."

~~ Paul Waldman
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/07/12/its_the_conservatism_stupid.php 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain)

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"  
wrote:
>
>  Denise Evans:
> > This table says how the money is being allocated
> > - way too much on war of course.
> >
> You sound like a reasonable person, Denise. Do you
> see any trends in this chart:
>


NOTE: It's a fake chart put out by fringe right wing blogs and it's not 
supported by legitimate objective facts. 


"The costs of the War on Terror are often contested, as academics and critics 
of the component wars (including the Iraq War) have unearthed many hidden costs 
not represented in official estimates. 

"The most recent major report on these costs come from Brown University in the 
form of the Costs of War  project, which said the total for wars in Iraq, 
Afghanistan, and Pakistan is at least $3.2-4 trillion.[1]  

The report disavowed previous estimates of the Iraq War's cost as being under 
$1 trillion, saying the Department of Defense's direct spending on Iraq totaled 
at least $757.8 billion, but also highlighting the complementary costs at home, 
such as interest paid on the funds borrowed to finance the wars and a potential 
nearly $1 trillion in extra spending to care for veterans returning from combat 
through 2050.[2]

"According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 
2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of 
$2.4 trillion dollars by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because 
combat is being financed with borrowed money. 

The CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, 
about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq, or $6,300 per U.S. 
citizen.[9][10]

Sources:

1. Costs of War. Brown University. http://costsofwar.org/

2. "Economic and Budgetary Costs of the Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan 
to the United States: A Summary". Costs of War. Brown University. 
http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/20/attachments/Economic%20Costs%20Summary.pdf.
 Retrieved 20 July 2011.

9. Richard Sammon (July 2007). "Iraq War: The Cost in Dollars". 
http://www.kiplinger.com/businessresource/forecast/archive/The_True_Cost_0720723.html.
 Retrieved 2007-07-23. 

10. U.S. CBO estimates $2.4 trillion long-term war costs". Reuters. October 
2007. http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2450753720071024. 
Retrieved 2007-10-24.

More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

SEE ALSO:

Cause of decline in U.S. financial position

Both economic conditions and policy decisions significantly worsened the debt 
outlook since 2001, when large surpluses were forecast for the following decade 
by the CBO. 

The Pew Center reported in April 2011 the cause of a $12.7 trillion shift in 
the debt situation, from a 2001 CBO forecast of $2.3 trillion cumulative 
surplus by 2011 versus the estimated $10.4 trillion public debt in 2011. The 
major drivers were:

* Revenue declines due to two recessions, separate from the Bush tax cuts of 
2001 and 2003: 28%

* Defense spending increases: 15%

* Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 13%

* Increases in net interest: 11%

* Other non-defense spending: 10%

* Other tax cuts: 8%

* Obama Stimulus: 6%

* Medicare Part D: 2%

* Other reasons: 7%[55]

Similar analyses were reported by the New York Times in June 2009,[56] the 
Washington Post in April 2011[57] and the Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities in May 2011.[58] 

Economist Paul Krugman wrote in May 2011: "What happened to the budget surplus 
the federal government had in 2000? The answer is, three main things. 

First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the 
national debt over the last decade. 

Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional 
$1.1 trillion or so. 

And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and 
to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net 
programs."[59] 

A Bloomberg analysis in May 2011 attributed $2.0 trillion of the $9.3 trillion 
of public debt (20%) to additional military and intelligence spending since 
September 2001, plus another $45 billion annually in interest.[60]

All sources documented ny number, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

[FairfieldLife] Whose government IS it?

[do.rflex]

2 cartoons 

Take a look: 
http://mariopiperni.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Bagley.jpg


Take *another* look: 
http://mariopiperni.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/carlson.jpg


Now, look up the word "plutocracy".

[FairfieldLife] FDR Warning about Today's Republicans

[do.rflex]

FDR tells the truth about the leaders of the modern Republican
party. Somehow, in 1936, he foresaw what would be happening NOW.

Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUZGkNAUSvY 

[FairfieldLife] Obama Backs Repeal of Gay-Marriage Ban [DOMA]

[do.rflex]

Obama backs Respect For Marriage Act

by Steve Benen


I don't have high hopes for the legislation — the House 
majority is still the House majority — but the Obama White
House's support  for the Respect For Marriage Act
  is the latest in a series of 
encouraging steps on civil rights.

President Obama is throwing his support behind the  Respect For Marriage
Act - the bill to repeal the 1996 Defense Of  Marriage Act, which banned
the federal government from recognizing  same-sex marriage even for
couples married under state law.

The president has "long called for a legislative appeal for the 
so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which continues to have a real impact
on families," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters at 
Tuesday's briefing. He said the president "is proud" to
support the  Respect For Marriage Act, "which would take the Defense
of Marriage Act  off the books for once and for all."

The bill was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Dianne Feinstein 
(D-Calif.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

This comes the same year as the Obama administration's decision to 
stop trying to defend DOMA against federal court challenges.

What's more, it's a heartening piece that fits into a larger
mosaic.


After two-and-a-half years, President Obama has successfully repealed 
the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law;


expanded federal benefits for the  same-sex partners of executive-branch
employees;


signed the Hate Crimes  Prevention Act into law; cleared the way for
hospital-visitation rights  for same-sex couples;


lifted the travel/immigration ban on those with  HIV/AIDS;


ordered the Federal Housing Authority to no longer consider  the sexual
orientation of applicants on loans;


expanded the Census to  include the number of people who report being in
a same-sex  relationship;


and hired more openly gay officials than any  administration in history.

There have also been more symbolic gestures, including the White  House
hosting an event to honor the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall  riots,
announcing the first-ever transgender presidential appointee, 
nominating the first openly-gay man to serve on the federal judiciary, 
honoring same-sex couples in his Mother's Day and Father's Day 
proclamations, recording a video for the "It Gets Better"
Project, and  hosting Gay and Lesbian Pride Month events at the White
House.

And today, the president has offered his well-timed endorsement of  the
Respect For Marriage Act.

I realize there are still a sizable number of people in the LGBT 
community who are unsatisfied with the pace of change, and consider 
President Obama someone who has ignored, and even betrayed, their 
interests. Some have even vowed not to lift a finger to help with the 
president's re-election effort.

I suspect many social-conservative activists, furious with the steps 
Obama has already taken to advance civil rights for the LGBT community, 
must find this inexplicable.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_07/obama_backs_re\
spect_for_marria030970.php

[FairfieldLife] Church of England faces being wiped out, report warns

[do.rflex]

-- In the last 40 years the number of adult churchgoers has fallen
by half while the number of children regularly worshipping in
public declined by 80 per cent, the study says.

The Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham, the Rt Rev Paul Butler,
will present findings to the Church's national assembly, the
General Synod, in York on Saturday.

Synod members will be urged to vote for a new national drive to
recruit more members.

Full article here: 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8626410/Church-of-England-faces-being-wiped-out-report-warns.html
 

[FairfieldLife] The Tax Cut Fairies

[do.rflex]

Trickle Down Tales - Animation by Mark Fiore

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/07/991950/-Trickle-Down-Tales?via=blog_1

[FairfieldLife] Hard addicts drop by half after decriminalization of drugs in Portugal

[do.rflex]

"Portugal's holistic approach had also
led to a 'spectacular' reduction in the
number of infections among intravenous users
and a significant drop in drug-related crimes."


LISBON — Health experts in Portugal said Friday that
Portugal's decision 10 years ago to decriminalise drug use and
treat addicts rather than punishing them is an experiment that
has worked.

"There is no doubt that the phenomenon of addiction is in decline
in Portugal," said Joao Goulao, President of the Institute of Drugs
and Drugs Addiction, a press conference to mark the 10th anniversary
of the law.

The number of addicts considered "problematic" -- those who
repeatedly use "hard" drugs and intravenous users -- had fallen by
half since the early 1990s, when the figure was estimated at
around 100,000 people, Goulao said.

Other factors had also played their part however, Goulao, a
medical doctor added.

"This development can not only be attributed to decriminalisation
but to a confluence of treatment and risk reduction policies."

Portugal's holistic approach had also led to a "spectacular"
reduction in the number of infections among intravenous users and
a significant drop in drug-related crimes, he added.

A law that became active on July 1, 2001 did not legalise drug use,
but forced users caught with banned substances to appear in front
of special addiction panels rather than in a criminal court.

The panels composed of psychologists, judges and social
workers recommended action based on the specifics of each case.

Since then, government panels have recommended a response based
largely on whether the individual is an occasional drug user or
an addict.

Of the nearly 40,000 people currently being treated, "the vast
majority of problematic users are today supported by a system that
does not treat them as delinquents but as sick people," Goulao said.

In a report published last week, the European Monitoring Centre
for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) said Portugal had dealt with
this issue "in a pragmatic and innovative way."

Drug use statistics in Portugal are generally "below the
European average and much lower than its only European
neighbour, Spain," the report also said.

"The changes that were made in Portugal provide an interesting
before-and-after study on the possible effects of
decriminalisation," EMCDDA said.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g9C6x99EnFVdFuXw_B8pvDRzLqcA?docId=CNG.e740b6d0077ba8c28f6d1dd931c6f679.5e1

[FairfieldLife] Christian Right backs Texas Gov Rick Perry for President

[do.rflex]

TIME
  reports that a group of prominent
figures on the Christian Right held a   conference call in early June
"to discuss their dissatisfaction with   the current GOP
presidential field, and agreed that Rick Perry would be   their
preferred candidate if he entered the race.


Among those on the   call were Tony Perkins of the Family Research 
Council; David Barton,  the Texas activist and go-to historian for the 
Christian Right; and  John Hagee, the controversial San Antonio pastor 
whose endorsement John  McCain rejected in 2008."

"Religious conservatives have often played a substantial role in  
choosing past Republican nominees, but leaders on the Christian Right  
have been conspicuously quiet so far in this campaign season. Privately,
however, they are enthusiastic about Perry and are encouraging the  
Texas governor to throw his ten-gallon hat in the ring."
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/07/05/christian_leaders_agreed_to\
_back_perry.html

[FairfieldLife] Casey Anthony Not Guilty of Murder

[do.rflex]

Casey Anthony Not Guilty in Slaying of  Daughter
ORLANDO — Casey Anthony, the young mother whose seeming
heartlessness  and barrage of lies transfixed America for three years,
was found not  guilty of murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee
Marie.


After nearly six weeks of testimony, a panel of seven women and five men
decided that Ms. Anthony did not murder Caylee by dosing her with 
chloroform, suffocating her with duct tape and dumping her in a wooded 
area, as prosecutors claimed. They also did, however, find her guilty of
lesser charges, of providing false information to law enforcement 
officers. The jury did not ask to review any evidence.

When the verdict was read, Ms Anthony, 25, who faced a possible death 
sentence, cried.

The verdict vindicates the defense, which argued from the start that 
Caylee drowned accidentally in the family swimming pool and that the 
death was concealed by her panicked grandfather, George Anthony, and Ms.
Anthony.

It also drove home just how circumstantial the prosecution's case
proved  to be. Forensic evidence was tenuous and no witnesses ever tied
Ms.  Anthony to Caylee's murder. Investigators found no trace of DNA
or solid  signs of chloroform or decomposition inside the trunk of Ms.
Anthony's  car, where prosecutors said Ms. Anthony stashed Caylee
before disposing  of her body.

The prosecution was also hurt by the fact that nobody knows exactly how 
Caylee died; her body was too badly decomposed to pinpoint cause of 
death.

All of this allowed José Baez, Ms. Anthony's lawyer, to infuse
enough  reasonable doubt in jurors' minds to get Ms. Anthony
acquitted of  murder.

"They throw enough against the wall and see what sticks," Mr.
Baez told  the jury, "right down to the cause of death."

Caylee, a 2-year-old with cherubic cheeks and bright eyes, was last seen
June 16, 2008. Her decomposed body was found six months later in a 
wooded area near the Anthony home. Despite her daughter's
disappearance,  Ms. Anthony failed to report Caylee missing for 31 days
and created a  tangle of lies, including that a baby sitter kidnapped
Caylee, to cover  up the absence.

The defense conceded Ms. Anthony's lies but said they happened for
one  reason: she had been sexually abused by her father and had been
coached  to lie her whole life.

"I told you she was a liar the first day," Mr. Baez told the
jury.

Despite a vivid portrait of Ms. Anthony's seemingly callous and 
deceitful behavior after Caylee's disappearance, jurors decided that
leap from uncaring mother to murderess proved too much.

Prosecutors argued all along that Ms. Anthony killed her child so she 
could carouse with her boyfriend, go clubbing and live the "bella
vita" —  beautiful life — as her tattoo, done after
Caylee's disappearance,  proclaimed.

"Whose life was better without Caylee?" Linda Drane Burdick, one
of the  prosecutors, asked jurors. "That's the only question you
need to answer  in considering why Caylee Marie Anthony was left on the
side of the road  dead."

With that, Ms. Drane Burdick ended her closing statement with a dramatic
flourish, leaving behind a split screen image: one side was a 
photograph of the tattoo, the other was a smiling Ms. Anthony partying 
with friends after Caylee's death.


Continue reading: 
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/06/us/06casey.html?_r=1

[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
> >>
> > I've never seen such partisan and one sided posting as from this
> particular poster, it is as if he can only see black and white or is so
> jaded in his way of thinking that objective thinking is no longer
> possible.
> >



> Yes do.rflex is a big idiot - it was probably not wise of you to respond
> to him because he gets very disoriented, disturbed and disjointed if he
> has to indulge in any human interactions. Please leave him alone in
> peace so he can just continue his copy and paste from various liberal
> websites in a mind-numbing, monotonous and mechanical manner.
> 


Watch 'em dance, folks.



> > And the incessant posting of websites that support his particular
> viewpoint is simplistic and a poor substitute for his own comments on
> the matter, like, what's he afraid of?, he might be wrong?
> >
> > At least Judy will engage.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > do.rflex:
> > > Why does God hate Texas?
> > > 
> > So, it seems that you hate a lot of different groups 
> > of people, for no apparent reason. 
> > 
> > Prejudice against certain group is always wrong, John. 
> > 
> > You've been taken to task for this on several 
> > occasions. You seem to be trying to outdo yourself. 
> > Don't you just hate those Mormons?
> > 
> > The outright prejudice of some of you TM Teachers is 
> > just astounding! What a hateful bunch of spiritual
> > impostors. Even Sal would probably agree with this
> > assessment!
> > 
> > This must be the bash-a-group week on FFL. Go figure. 
> > 
> > 2006–2008 American Community Survey, the racial and 
> > ethnic composition of Texas:
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas
> 
> I've never seen such partisan and one sided posting as from this particular 
> poster, it is as if he can only see black and white or is so jaded in his way 
> of thinking that objective thinking is no longer possible.
> 



Projection is a fascinating response to having one's particular nerves hit on 
target.



> And the incessant posting of websites that support his particular viewpoint 
> is simplistic and a poor substitute for his own comments on the matter, like, 
> what's he afraid of?, he might be wrong?
> 
> At least Judy will engage.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon  wrote:
>
> It is prophesied that a leader shall come out of the desert where the fire 
> and 
> heat shall temper his power! Can I get an Amen on that!
> 



"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and 
you're going to burn in hell.  The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy 
thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love."

~~  Butch Hancock 



> 
> 
> 
> ____
> From: do.rflex 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 1:07:11 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?
> 
>   
> 
> 
> God's Answer to Rick Perry's Prayers for Rain: Go to Hell
> 
> By Blue Texan - Friday July 1, 2011
> 
> -- On April 21, The Secessionist, who last year sued the EPA so
> Texas could dump even more carbon into the atmosphere (which
> totally doesn't cause global warming), used his elected office to
> ask thepeople of his state to pray that God might end our worst
> drought in over 100 years.
> 
> This is what the drought conditions were that week.
> 
> See Graph: 
> http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/files/2011/07/Screen-shot-2011-07-01-at-9.08.58-AM-300x176.png
> 
> 
> And this is what they are this week:
> 
> See 2nd Graph: http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/DM_state.htm?TX,S
> 
> Why does God hate Texas?
> 
> http://firedoglake.com/2011/07/01/gods-answer-to-rick-perrys-prayers-for-rain-go-to-hell/
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon  wrote:
>
> It is prophesied that a leader shall come out of the desert where the fire 
> and 
> heat shall temper his power! Can I get an Amen on that!
> 


"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and 
you're going to burn in hell.  The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy 
thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love." 
~~  Butch Hancock 




> 
> 
> 
> ____
> From: do.rflex 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 1:07:11 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?
> 
>   
> 
> 
> God's Answer to Rick Perry's Prayers for Rain: Go to Hell
> 
> By Blue Texan - Friday July 1, 2011
> 
> -- On April 21, The Secessionist, who last year sued the EPA so
> Texas could dump even more carbon into the atmosphere (which
> totally doesn't cause global warming), used his elected office to
> ask thepeople of his state to pray that God might end our worst
> drought in over 100 years.
> 
> This is what the drought conditions were that week.
> 
> See Graph: 
> http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/files/2011/07/Screen-shot-2011-07-01-at-9.08.58-AM-300x176.png
> 
> 
> And this is what they are this week:
> 
> See 2nd Graph: http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/DM_state.htm?TX,S
> 
> Why does God hate Texas?
> 
> http://firedoglake.com/2011/07/01/gods-answer-to-rick-perrys-prayers-for-rain-go-to-hell/
>

[FairfieldLife] Let It Burn

[do.rflex]

Let It Burn 
by John Cole

Meanwhile, in  Minnesota:

With no sign of a budget deal in sight, Minnesota  awoke on Saturday to
Day 2 of a state government shutdown, and, if  anything, more confusion
— not moreclarity — about how one actually  carries out this
sort of thing.
Consider these nuanced rules: the state's Department of Revenue says
it still expects people to pay their taxes, but it will not be sending 
out refunds. Residents may renew their driver's licenses in certain 
locations, but no actual driver's exams will be offered. The
Minnesota  Zoo is closed to visitors, but a "Music in the Zoo"
concert series,  including a performance on Saturday evening by The
Monkees, of 1960s  fame, was to proceed (though no non-human animals
were to be on  display).

Any questions?

If so, you may not wish to call the state in search of clarity. Some 
closed Minnesota departments are, of course, not there to answer the 
phones. Or their email. Or to update their Websites; many departments, 
in fact, redirected Web visitors to BeReadyMn.com for a rundown of the 
state's contingency plans and a sense of which services, deemed 
critical, have gone right on.

And so, as Minnesota's politicians, whose clash over how to fix the 
state's deficit led to a shutdown that began Friday, took what some 
described as a cooling-off period with no further negotiations this 
weekend, Minnesotans were left to navigate what it really meant to close
a state — a scenario rarely undertaken in the nation and, it seemed
by  Saturday, one with few sure, simple rules.

I'm increasingly of the opinion that we need to give the wingnuts 
what they want.  Shut it all down.  No police.  No firemen.  No National
Guard.  Just let the god damned state burn.


I am so fed up with these  fanatics and lunatics, I just want them to
get a good solid dose of what  they really want.  I'm tired of
protecting them from themselves.  And  I'm tired of the underclass
of very poor wingnuts who make no money,  rely on the state and the
feds, but vote for these nutjobs because the  baby jeebus tells them to.
Maybe a couple months without the services  they need to survive will
knock some sense into them.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/07/04/let-it-burn-3/

[FairfieldLife] Does Rick Perry's God have something against Texas?

[do.rflex]

God's Answer to Rick Perry's Prayers for Rain: Go to Hell

By Blue Texan - Friday July 1, 2011


-- On April 21, The Secessionist, who last year sued the EPA so
Texas could dump even more carbon into the atmosphere (which
totally doesn't cause global warming), used his elected office to
ask thepeople of his state to pray that God might end our worst
drought in over 100 years.

This is what the drought conditions were that week.

See Graph: 
http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/files/2011/07/Screen-shot-2011-07-01-at-9.08.58-AM-300x176.png

And this is what they are this week:

See 2nd Graph: http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/DM_state.htm?TX,S

Why does God hate Texas?

http://firedoglake.com/2011/07/01/gods-answer-to-rick-perrys-prayers-for-rain-go-to-hell/
 

[FairfieldLife] 4th of July GOP/Teabagger History Lesson

[do.rflex]

Cartoon From Tom Tomorrow

Click to enlarge: 
http://images2.dailykos.com/i/user/2722/TMW2011-07-06colorlowres.jpg 

[FairfieldLife] Record Corporate Profits and the Rich -vs- Everybody Else

[do.rflex]

Record Corporate Profits, the GOP's Wet Dream - But where's the ' Trickle-Down 
' ?

CARTOON:
http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/sites/default/files/images/stei101130_cmyk-1.jpg


Two-thirds of the nation's total income gains from 2002 to 2007
flowed to the top 1 percent of U.S. households, and that top
1 percent held a larger share of income in 2007 than at any time
since 1928
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2908


Since 2009, 88 Percent Of Income Growth Went To Corporate Profits, Just One 
Percent Went To Wages
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/30/258388/corporate-profits-recovery/


The richest 1% of Americans -- those making $380,000 or more -- have seen their 
incomes grow 33% over the last 20 years, leaving average Americans in the dust.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm


The Rise of the SUPER RICH - See Chart:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/chart-rise-of-super-rich-2.top.gif
 

[FairfieldLife] We tried it their way and Republicans pretend it never happened

[do.rflex]

Kevin Drum looks back on the last decade:

 Republicans got the tax cuts they wanted. They got the financial
 deregulation they wanted. They got the wars they wanted. They got
 the unfunded spending increases they wanted.

 And the results were completely, unrelentingly disastrous.

 - A decade of sluggish growth and near-zero wage increases.

 - A massive housing bubble.

 - Trillions of dollars in war spending and thousands of American
lives lost.

 - A financial collapse.

 - A soaring long-term deficit.

 - Sky-high unemployment.

 All on their watch and all due to policies they eagerly supported.

 And even worse, ever since the predictable results of their
 recklessness came crashing down, they've rabidly and nearly
 unanimously opposed every single attempt to dig ourselves out of
 the hole they created for us.

 But despite the fact that this is all recent history, it's
treated
 like some kind of dreamscape.

 No one talks about it.

 Republicans pretend it never happened.

 Fox News insists that what we need is an even bigger dose of the
 medicine we got in the aughts, and this is, inexplicably, treated
 seriously by the rest of the press corps instead of being laughed
 at.

Via Washington Monthly - More at link:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_07/we_tried_it_th\
eir_way030646.php

[FairfieldLife] Re: Republicans protect Millionaires - Minnesota government shuts down

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans  wrote:
>
> A 21st century slave society
> My last two years in corporate america were spent repeating to myself that I 
> was a "slave", which wasn't far from the truth
> 



Michael Tomasky in the Daily Beast tells Why the GOP Loves the Debt:


"They scream about 'crisis' because
what they desire is to use the 'crisis'
as an excuse to do things to this country
that the hard right has wanted to do
for 30 years."


The GOP House speaker in Minnesota is quoted in the Star-Tribune today 
inveighing against saddling future generations with debt. I don't know the man, 
so I'll allow for the possibility that he's sincere. But at the highest levels, 
the Republican Party cares nothing about the public debt. In fact, it wants 
more. Americans must understand this.

It is the party of debt. It is the party of deficits. It is the party of 
recession. It is the party of unemployment. It is the party of inequality. And 
it is the party of middle-class stagnation and slippage.

It is the party of all these things because it needs these conditions to 
exist—so that its leaders can scream "Crisis!" But they don't desire in any 
meaningful way to fix the crisis.

They scream about crisis because what they desire is to use the crisis as an 
excuse to do things to this country that the hard right has wanted to do for 30 
years.

We see it all over the place. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and Ohio Governor 
John Kasich could have behaved more like other governors around the country 
who've won labor concessions, like New York Democrat Andrew Cuomo.

But they sought to go much farther with their "emergency" bills. Why? Well, as 
long as there's an economic emergency, they can just repeat "Crisis! Crisis! 
Crisis!" and a certain percentage of the public and the gullible and hopeful 
media, which refuses to believe that governmental leaders can possibly be as 
deceitful as these people are, will buy it.

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/01/the-gop-party-of-debt-and-deficits.html






> --- On Sat, 7/2/11, Bhairitu  wrote:
> 
> From: Bhairitu 
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Republicans protect Millionaires - Minnesota 
> government shuts down
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 2, 2011, 10:00 AM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
>   The Republicans are doing this to buy the country for pennies on the 
> 
> dollar.  They are materialists who focus only on wealth.   They want to 
> 
> regain their ancestral legacy of being feudal landlords.  They've been 
> 
> trying to do this ever since the US was founded.  And I won't be an 
> 
> obedient serf (and no one else should either).
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/02/2011 09:35 AM, Denise Evans wrote:
> 
> > The link below has some interesting info on the influence of the Koch 
> > brothers in taking down the government, etc.  
> 
> > What I don't understand is...what is the end game of the Republican 
> > philosophy...if the working class go down, so does the country...we already 
> > are going down...what is the purpose...what is the gain?  The U.S. 
> > definitely won't be able to retain the facade of "most powerful country."  
> 
> > Activism is the answer - I see civil war in this country in the future, if 
> > the Republican's get their way.  
> 
> > www.bravenewfoundation.org
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > --- On Fri, 7/1/11, Bhairitu  wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > From: Bhairitu
> 
> > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Republicans protect Millionaires - 
> > Minnesota government shuts down
> 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> 
> > Date: Friday, July 1, 2011, 7:45 PM
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >   
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >On 07/01/2011 06:21 PM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"   wrote:
> 
> >>> The Republicans are becoming more aggressive in pursuing
> 
> >>> their agenda.  It's the American version of suicide bombing.
> 
> >>> The Minnesota government shutdown is just a preview of what
> 
> >>> the Republicans will do at the national level.
> 
> >>> In general, both major parties at the national level need to
> 
> >>> forsake their ideologies in order the solve the bigger
> 
> >>> problem of national government deficit spending and the
> 
> >>> mounting national debt.
> 
> >> That isn't the bigger problem. The bigger problem is
> 
> >> unemployment and its consequences throughout the economy.
> 
> >> We need *more* government spending--MUCH more--not less,
> 
> >> for the economy to be strong enough to fix the deficit.
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > They don't seem to have much trouble spending on blowing up things.
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >

[FairfieldLife] Current GOP Leaders Voted 19 Times To Increase Debt Limit By $4 Trillion

[do.rflex]

During Bush Presidency, Current GOP Leaders Voted 19 Times To Increase 
Debt Limit By $4 Trillion

By Travis Waldron on Apr
14, 2011


   After pushing the government to brink of shutdown last week, 
Republican Congressional leaders are now preparing to push America to 
the edge of default by refusing to increase the nation's debt limit 
without first getting Democrats to concede to large spending cuts.
But while the four Republicans in Congressional leadership positions 
are attempting to hold  the increase hostage
  now, they combined to vote for a debt limit  increase 19
times during the presidency of George W. Bush. In doing so,  they
increased the debt limit by nearly $4 trillion.

At the beginning of the Bush presidency, the United States debt limit 
was $5.95 trillion. Despite promises that he would pay  off the debt in
10 years
 , Bush increased the debt to $9.815  trillion
  by the end of
his term, with plenty of help from the four  Republicans currently
holding Congressional leadership positions:  Speaker John Boehner, House
Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Senate Minority  Leader Mitch McConnell,
and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl. ThinkProgress  compiled a breakdown of
the five debt limit increases that took place  during the Bush
presidency and how the four Republican leaders voted:

June
   2002
 :  Congress approves a
$450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to  $6.4 trillion.
McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote "yea", Kyl votes 
"nay."

May 2003  : 
Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to 
$7.384 trillion. All four approve.

November   
2004  : 
Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to 
$8.1 trillion. All four approve.

March 2006  : 
Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to 
$8.965 trillion. All four approve.

September  2007
 : Congress
approves an $850 billion increase, raising  the debt limit to $9.815
trillion. All four approve.

Database searches revealed no demands from the four legislators that 
debt increases come accompanied by drastic spending cuts, as  there are
now
 . In fact, the May 2003
debt limit increase passed the  Senate the same day as the $350  billion
Bush tax cuts for the wealthy
 .

When Bush was in office, the current Republican leaders viewed 
increasing the debt limit as vital to keeping America's economy
running.  But with Obama in the White House, it's nothing more than
a political  pawn.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/04/14/158424/republican-leaders-d\
ebt-limit-hypocrisy/

[FairfieldLife] Austerity for everyone, except the rich

[do.rflex]

I think it's long past time we stopped pretending that any of this
has roots in sudden concern for the "deficit." Nobody involved gave
a damn about the deficit when they were running it up, during the
Bush years: "deficits didn't matter", we were famously told.
Republican hand-wringing over the debt ceiling then was scarce
indeed, during the repeated votes to raise it over and over again.

Republican insistence that the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy did
not contribute to inflated deficits were and are simply ludicrous,
and have always been absolutely false.

SEE: Critics Still Wrong on What's Driving Deficits
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

And even little addle-minded children can recognize that the
best single way out of deficits is to get out of the recession,
which requires government intervention on behalf of the working
class, not against it.

There is only one common factor between actions of the various
state governments and the federal government: austerity for
everyone, except the rich. Regardless of any deficit, taxes on the
rich must not be raised. Period.

As an honest approach for reducing the deficit, it is scattered
and nonsensical. As an organized effort to strip money and
services from the lower classes on behalf of the wealthy, however,
it remains perfectly consistent, month after month, in state after state.

"Class war" may not be the term our politicians prefer to use, but
as description of the actual policy it is more accurate than any other.

~Excerpted from: 
http://www.freeinstinct.com/2011/06/the-new-class-war-new-jersey-edition/

[FairfieldLife] Re: CBO: ' If Congress Does Nothing, The Deficit Will Disappear '

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> The CBO is taking ayuhuasca to come up with this kind of magical olution.  
> The chart does not show the effects of the national debt an its inheren 
> interest costs.
> 



The CBO is addressing the deficit. In order to address the debt, the deficit 
has to be in order.



> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Deficit crisis?  - One Chart Explains the Big Lie
> > 
> > 
> > CHART OF THE DAY: 
> > If Congress Does Nothing, The Deficit Will Disappear
> > 
> > 
> > "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
> > projects that deficits will disappear
> > entirely by the end of President Obama's
> > second term (if he gets a second term)
> > if Congress were to just sit on its
> > hands and do nothing." 
> > 
> > 
> > -- On Wednesday, the Congressional Budget Office released its
> > updated long-term budget forecast, which looked surprisingly like
> > the previous version of its long-term budget forecast.
> > 
> > It showed, as one might expect, that if the Bush tax-cuts remain
> > in effect and Medicare and Medicaid spending isn't constrained in
> > some way, the country will topple into a genuine fiscal crisis --
> > not the fake one the Congress is pretending the country's in right
> > now.
> > 
> > Republicans, of course, seized on that particular projection,
> > and claimed (a bit ridiculously) that it proved the government
> > must adopt their precise policy views: major spending
> > cuts, particularly to entitlement programs.
> > 
> > While all this -- from the findings to the politicization of them --
> > is perfectly expected, the forecast also presents another
> > opportunity to remind people that the medium-term budget outlook
> > is perfectly fine if Congress adheres to the law as it's
> > currently written.
> > 
> > That means no repealing the health care law, for one, but
> > more significantly it means allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire,
> > and (unfathomably) allowing Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors
> > to fall to the levels prescribed by the formula Congress wrote
> > almost 15 years ago. In other words, no more "doc fixes."
> > 
> > Helpfully, CBO juxtaposed these two alternative futures in a pair
> > of graphs and, just as last time, it projects that deficits
> > will disappear entirely by the end of President Obama's second term
> > (if he gets a second term) if Congress were to just sit on its
> > hands and do nothing.
> > 
> > Take a look at the CHART: 
> > http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/CBOextendedalternative1.jpg
> > 
> > via: 
> > http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/chart-of-the-day-if-congress-does-nothing-the-deficit-will-disappear.php?ref=fpb
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] CBO: ' If Congress Does Nothing, The Deficit Will Disappear '

[do.rflex]

Deficit crisis?  - One Chart Explains the Big Lie


CHART OF THE DAY: 
If Congress Does Nothing, The Deficit Will Disappear


"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
projects that deficits will disappear
entirely by the end of President Obama's
second term (if he gets a second term)
if Congress were to just sit on its
hands and do nothing." 


-- On Wednesday, the Congressional Budget Office released its
updated long-term budget forecast, which looked surprisingly like
the previous version of its long-term budget forecast.

It showed, as one might expect, that if the Bush tax-cuts remain
in effect and Medicare and Medicaid spending isn't constrained in
some way, the country will topple into a genuine fiscal crisis --
not the fake one the Congress is pretending the country's in right
now.

Republicans, of course, seized on that particular projection,
and claimed (a bit ridiculously) that it proved the government
must adopt their precise policy views: major spending
cuts, particularly to entitlement programs.

While all this -- from the findings to the politicization of them --
is perfectly expected, the forecast also presents another
opportunity to remind people that the medium-term budget outlook
is perfectly fine if Congress adheres to the law as it's
currently written.

That means no repealing the health care law, for one, but
more significantly it means allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire,
and (unfathomably) allowing Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors
to fall to the levels prescribed by the formula Congress wrote
almost 15 years ago. In other words, no more "doc fixes."

Helpfully, CBO juxtaposed these two alternative futures in a pair
of graphs and, just as last time, it projects that deficits
will disappear entirely by the end of President Obama's second term
(if he gets a second term) if Congress were to just sit on its
hands and do nothing.

Take a look at the CHART: 
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/CBOextendedalternative1.jpg

via: 
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/chart-of-the-day-if-congress-does-nothing-the-deficit-will-disappear.php?ref=fpb

[FairfieldLife] Republicans Are Intentionally Sabotaging the Economy

[do.rflex]

"Our top political priority over the next two years
should be to deny President Obama a second term in office."

~~Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, October 2010
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44688.html




To those of us observing, this comes as no surprise. A year ago I  wrote
about it here
 ,  and expanded on it here
 ,  here
   and here
 .

And now, Senator Schumer has hammered that home in this speech at EPI
 .

And we need to start asking ourselves an  uncomfortable question –
are Republicans slowing down the recovery on  purpose for political gain
in 2012? It's one thing for them to block  programs they have always
opposed. But when they start to contradict  themselves by opposing
programs they have supported—such as pro-business  tax cuts—we
are left to wonder.

Let's not forget – Senator McConnell made it clear last October that
his  number one priority, above everything else, is to defeat President 
Obama.

And now it is becoming clear that insisting on a slash-and-burn 
approach may be part of this plan – it has a double-benefit for 
Republicans: it is ideologically tidy and it undermines the economic 
recovery, which they think only helps them in 2012.

The result is that Republicans aren`t just opposing the  President
any more. They are opposing the economic recovery itself – and  all
that means for America's working and middle class families.

It's about damn time someone called the naked emperor out. I am so 
tired of hearing the press memes about Obama this, Obama that, and how 
it's all going to land on the head of Obama. No. These crazy lunatics on
the right are colluding with their corporate brothers to bring down 
this economy with the assistance of the media.

During the Bush administration the debt ceiling had to be raised 
several times. Note the difference in how  it was covered
  from
2001-2008.


The Beltway media was certainly  willing to report an increase as a
'painful vote', but not one in  question. There was never any question
that the debt ceiling would be  increased then. The only question then
was whether the debt ceiling  would be raised while the Bush tax cuts
were cemented in at the same  time. They were.

If we could possibly get the media to actually report what  Republicans
are doing -- bankrupting the country, stalling any economic  growth for
short-term Republican gains, keeping unemployment rates high  by
decimating the ranks of government employees, and more -- maybe there 
would be an opportunity to move past the stupid finger-pointing into 
some thoughtful debate about how wrong it is to keep tax rates low while
the entire country suffers as a result.


http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/republicans-are-intentionally-sabotagin\
g-ec

[FairfieldLife] Only 8% blame Obama for the state of the nation’s economy

[do.rflex]

The latest New York Times/CBS News poll, released Wednesday,  included
the  question
  that continues to surprise me:


"Who do you think is mostly  to blame for the current state of the
nation's economy — (1) the Bush  administration, (2) the Obama
administration, (3) Wall Street and  financial institutions, (4)
Congress, or (5) someone else?"

And as with all other recent polls on this, the public still  isn't
blaming the president
 
the way Republicans had hoped.

Few Americans blame the President for the economy's  current
condition, however.


Only 8% think the Obama administration  deserves most of the blame for
the state of the nation's economy.


More  say George W. Bush's administration (26%) and Wall Street and
financial  institutions (25%) are mostly to blame. 11% blame Congress.

Got that? On the list of relevant institutions, the Obama 
administration ranks near the bottom on the list of those getting  the
blame for the economy. What's more, the numbers have been pretty 
steady on this for the last year and a half.

When I wrote about this earlier in the week, I got all kinds of angry 
emails from conservatives insisting that the poll I cited was wrong. It 
couldn't be true that Americans are declining to blame Obama because
…  well, it just couldn't.

But I'm just the messenger here, and all of the surveys say the same
thing. The latest polls from McClatchy/Marist
   and NBC/WSJ
   show the exact same thing as the CBS/NYT poll:
Americans are angry,  frustrated, and pessimistic about the economy, but
most of the public  just doesn't see Obama as the main culprit.

One need not like the results to see the results as they exist.

If it makes the right feel any better, this dynamic may well change. 
The economic circumstances may reach a point where public impatience 
boils over, and the blame shifts.

But for now, the "he  made it worse
 " crowd isn't persuading many
people.

by Steve Benen 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_07/why_the_blame_\
game_matters_con030623.php

[FairfieldLife] Republicans protect Millionaires - Minnesota government shuts down

[do.rflex]

In the end, this
   is why
the Minnesota government shut down: The governor said his last offer
would have raised income  taxes only on those earning more than $1
million a year—an estimated  7,700 Minnesotans, or 0.3 percent of
all taxpayers, according to the  Revenue Department.
Republicans rejected the proposal, Dayton said, because they "prefer  to
protect the richest handful of Minnesotans at the expense of everyone 
else."

Today, more than 20,000 state workers are off the job to protect  those
7,700 people from a tax increase. That's 7,700 people, remember,  who
already pay  a lower percentage
  of their incomes in state and local taxes
than  the average Minnesotan:
In particular, the wealthiest one percent of Minnesota  households —
those with incomes over $429,000 — paid 9.7 percent of  their
incomes in total state and local taxes in 2008, compared to the 
statewide average of 11.5 percent.
The GOP had a couple of "compromise" ideas for a budget agreement. 
They:
proposed delaying another $700 million in payments owed to  schools,
which would add to the more than $1 billion the state already  owes K-12
schools.
Republicans also offered to issue "tobacco bonds" of an unspecified 
amount to cover any remaining budget gap. Sources said Dayton considered
the offer, but he criticized it as unwise borrowing late Thursday.

Another offer:
asked Dayton to accept controversial policy positions the  Republicans
pushed for this year, including photo ID requirements at the  polls and
abortion restrictions. An offer sheet provided to the Star  Tribune said
the policy adoptions were in exchange for "new revenue in a  compromise
offer."
This in a nutshell is today's Republican party: to protect 7,700 
millionaires from slightly higher taxes, they'll shut down state 
government. But they might be willing to do something on revenue 
(whether it involved the 7,700 millionaires, we don't know) in exchange 
for making it more difficult to vote or get an abortion.


That last, by  the way, is similar to Iowa
 ,  where Republicans tried to block the use of Medicaid funds for
some  abortions; ultimately they compromised on various ways of trying
to talk  women out of their decision in the guise of "offering
information."

Links here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/01/990439/-Minnesota-government-sh\
uts-down?via=blog_1

[FairfieldLife] Re: Poll: Republican dominated Texas prefers Obama over Perry

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> do.rflex:
> > A poll released Wednesday showed that in a 
> > hypothetical match-up for the presidency, 
> > President Barack Obama would defeat Texas 
> > Gov. Rick Perry among Texas voters by a margin 
> > of 45-47 percent...
> > 
> It's not Rick Perry that you should be worried
> about. What you should be worried about is a 
> Mitt Romney/Rick Perry nomination. That kind of
> combination worked for JFK/LBJ - it could work
> again. 


I don't think so.

Almost everyone agrees Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) will be on the ultimate 
Republican presidential nominee's short list for vice president and Stephen 
Moore says his contacts in Mitt Romney's campaign are boasting: "Doesn't a 
Romney-Rubio ticket sound great?"

Said one senior Romney advisor: "We think that could be a dream ticket." 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/06/23/romney-rubio_in_2012.html


Bill Maher on Rick Perry:

"And finally New Rule, if you think the Republican presidential candidates 
can't possibly get any lamer, then you haven't met the new Republican flavor of 
the month, Rick Perry. If you're not familiar with Rick, he took over as 
governor of Texas from George W. Bush, who's now referred to as 'the smart 
one.' 

"Rick carries a gun even when he's jogging. He wears cowboy boots with a suit, 
and the boots say, "come and take it", which sounds kind of gay to me.

"And he threw such a tantrum when Obama won, he actually talked about Texas 
seceding from the union, because that's what America needs; a President of the 
United States who's not really sold on the whole 'United States' concept.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/new-rule-if-you-thought-current-gop-field

[FairfieldLife] Poll: Republican dominated Texas prefers Obama over Perry

[do.rflex]

-- A poll released Wednesday showed that in a hypothetical match-up for the 
presidency, President Barack Obama would defeat Texas Gov. Rick Perry among 
Texas voters by a margin of 45-47 percent.

The findings put an exclamation point on the Republican governor's bizarre 
claim that he is a "prophet" because he's "not generally loved in his hometown."

Texas is dominated by Republicans, who hold a super majority in the legislature.

According to data from the Democrat-affiliated group Public Policy Polling, a 
large majority (59 percent) of Texans do not want their governor to seek the 
presidency, and only 33 percent would support him if he did.

Overall, the poll found that 55 percent of Texans rate Perry's job performance 
negatively, compared to 42 percent who say he's done a good job.

Perry, who took the office after the Supreme Court named George W. Bush 
President of the United States in 2000, is the nation's longest serving 
governor, having won three terms.

Since 2008, Texas has seen unemployment nearly double, alongside a doubling of 
the number of workers who are paid minimum wage or less.

In that same time, the state's budget deficit also widened to over $25 billion, 
forcing the legislature to pass dramatic cuts in their most recent session, 
including $4 billion in reductions for public education.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/06/29/poll-texans-prefer-obama-over-perry/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fox News Fact Check

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> do.rflex:
> > Jon Stewart takes down Fox News like only he can.
> >
> So, did Jon Stewart's follow-up attack on Fox News
> come across as spiteful? Yes, since he made a big
> false statement on TV in front of millions of people.
>
> His misstatement makes all his other statements seem
> false as well. Stewart told a fib and Manning thinks
> it's funny. So, I guess that makes Manning and Stewart
> both really stupid liars. Go figure.
>
> "The way Stewart phrased the comment, it's not enough
> to show a sliver of evidence that Fox News' audience
> is ill-informed. The evidence needs to support the
> view that the data shows they are 'consistently'
> misinformed — a term he used not once but three times.
> It's simply not true that 'every poll' shows that
> result. So we rate his claim False." - PolitiFact
>


Politifact Is False: Every Poll Shows Fox News Viewers Are The Most
Misinformed

  At DeSmogBlog, Chris Mooney debunks Politifact's "false
<http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/\
jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/> "  rating of
Jon Stewart's claim that "every poll" shows Fox News viewers
to be the "most  consistently misinformed
<http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201106190001> ."

Mooney, author of The Republican War  on Science, explains that all 
five studies
<http://www.desmogblog.com/jon-stewart-1-politifact-0-fox-news-viewers-a\
re-most-misinformed>  done on the question find that watching Fox News
and  believing political misinformation — on the Iraq War, global
warming,  health care legislation, and other contentious  political
issues <http://www.desmogblog.com/fox-news-effect-few-references>  —
are strongly correlated.

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/06/22/251036/politifact-is-false-eve\
ry-poll-shows-fox-news-viewers-are-the-most-misinformed/

[FairfieldLife] Just what America needs . . .

[do.rflex]

If you're not familiar with Rick Perry,
he took over as governor of Texas from
George W. Bush, who's now referred to
as "the smart one."

~~  Bill Maher


Cartoon - Take a look: http://www.bartcop.com/perry-clowns.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Fox News Fact Check

[do.rflex]

Jon Stewart takes down Fox News like only he can.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-21-2011/fox-news-false-statements

[FairfieldLife] Gauging Obama’s support at Netroots Nation

[do.rflex]

One of the more notable discussions at this year's Netroots Nation 
conference was when White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer sat
down with Daily Kos' Kaili Joy Gray. Pfeiffer joked about going into
"the lion's den," but even he probably wasn't prepared
for the pushback  from the left.

At times, the discussion was uncomfortably hostile — Pfeiffer was 
even booed at one point — and reinforced the notion that President
Obama  faces serious and widespread discontent among many on the left.

It also made these  results
  unexpected.

Despite their grousing about the administration during  the Netroots
Nation conference, liberal activists and bloggers are  relatively happy
with President Barack Obama's performance.

A straw poll conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research  showed that
80 percent either approve or strongly approve of the  president more
than a year before voters head to the polls to decide  whether he
deserves a second term. The results broke down to 27 percent  strongly
approving of Obama and 53 percent approving "somewhat." 
Thirteen percent said they "somewhat disapprove," and 7 percent
strongly  disapprove of the president.

I wasn't at the conference this year, but based solely on reports 
from those who were there, I wouldn't have expected the
president's  support to be nearly this high among attendees.

This is not to say that liberal discontent with Obama is a myth.  Those
attendees jeering Pfeiffer on Friday weren't just kidding; they 
were expressing anger, frustration, and at times, pure contempt.

The question is one about numbers. GQR Research found roughly four  out
of five NN attendees still support the president, while Gallup shows 
Obama's standing with the Democratic base a little higher than that.

For all the talk about Obama's base abandoning him, the evidence to 
support this is shaky, at best. The discontent is real, but it
doesn't  appear to be wide or deep, at least not at this point.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/gauging_obamas\
_support_at_netr030370.php

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maher: Could the GOP Field for President get any Lamer? Meet Rick Perry

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardjwilliamstexas"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> do.rflex:
> > Could the GOP Field for President get any
> > Lamer?
> >
> Obviously you like high gas prices and out of
> control Washington spending!
>
> Oh yeah, Rick Perry - isn't he the guy that
> balanced the budget in Texas without raising
> taxes? The governor that created 47.8% of all
> the jobs created in the U.S.A. in the last two
> years?
>
> 'First Reading: Rick Perry's good weekend'
> Austin American-Statesman
> http://tinyurl.com/3unyo67
>


Just in case Rick Perry does get in the race, you wanna read  this
<http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/rick-perry-2012-presidential-bid-\
5937058#ixzz1Pk0LBiA8> .  Here's a funny excerpt:

And in Texas, what works is to swagger around like a  tough guy,
propagating a barely literate reading of the United States 
Constitution, and pretend to hate the federal government. And you rail 
about the rights that have been taken away, without being able to name 
one. And you publicly entertain having your state secede from the United
States, and issue dire warnings about the galloping socialism in the 
land, and rage at the federal stimulus package and make a show of 
refusing to accept any of it, while quietly taking a cool $28 billion.
It is the refuge of a scoundrel to pretend to hate government, and 
further, to lie about the role that the American government — the 
richest and most powerful force for good in the long story of humanity
—  has played in the creation of the most profound economic engine
ever,  the America middle class. Notions of American greatness are
inextricably  intertwined with the American government, and anyone who
claims that  the government has only been an impediment to American
progress is a  liar, a fool, a rank opportunist, or a combination of the
three.

Also, too, I did not realize that Gov. Perry signed a resolution calling
on all Texans to pray for rain.  That is so awesome.


http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2011/6/19/125552/820

[FairfieldLife] Re: How Can Some "Christians" Be Filled With so Much Hate and Violence?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> I get emails all the time from a guy who puts "In God We Trust" in big red
> letters at the bottoms of them. Most of them are political things which a
> quick search on Snopes reveals to be complete fabrications. Seems rather
> ironic to me, since the 9th commandment is "You shall not bear false witness
> against your neighbor." Doesn't that mean don't lie?
>


"Oh, I don't reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It's just that so many of 
you Christians are so unlike your Christ." 

~~ Mahatma Ghandi 

[FairfieldLife] Cartoon of the Day - Never Ending Conservative Carnival of Crazy

[do.rflex]

>From Tom Tomorrow

Take a look (click to enlarge): 
http://images2.dailykos.com/i/user/2722/TMW2011-06-22colorlowres.jpg 

[FairfieldLife] Maher: Could the GOP Field for President get any Lamer? Meet Rick Perry

[do.rflex]

Bill Maher threw potential GOP presidential candidate and
current Governor of Texas Rick Perry under the bus and ran over him
a few times during his New Rules segment on Real Time With Bill
Maher this week.

Video here: 
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/new-rule-if-you-thought-current-gop-field
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Eternal relationship with God vs Merging with the Absolute

[do.rflex]

; calls his bluff, exposing his hairy butt, revealing the Wolf; and a phoney 
> attempt to trick the Impersonalists into worshipping Krishna: It's
> ...
> "And then there is Bhagawan which is the Absolute with personal form"
> 
> That's it right there!. Let's go over this examining the key words. First, 
> "Bhagavan". By this he really means "Krishna". It's obvious this deceiver is 
> a Hare Krishna Vaishava Gaudiya Bhakti akin to the Hare Krisha Guruonly 
> the latter was a white zebra with black stripes, and this Guru is black with 
> white stripes. There both zebras.((but no offense to black or white...just 
> the same old critter but differing stripes).
> ...
> OK, as stated a million times, there's no evidence that (even if there were a 
> "Bhagavan"), that Krishna is THE Bhagavan, as opposed to (say) YHVH.  Apart 
> from Vaisnava Scriptures chiefly the Srimad Bhagavan, what's the evidence 
> that Krishna is "Bhagavan"?
> ...
> In order to pull the wool of your eyes, he's simply replaced "Supreme 
> Personality of Godhead", with "Bhagavan", and tricked you even more.
> ...
> Next, the sentence says "...which is the Absolute". Duuuhhheverything is 
> the Absolute. A dirt clod = the Buddha. There is no Absolute "above" the 
> Absolute. A dirt clod is equal in its Absoluteness to Krishna. Krishna is not 
> "more" Absolute than dog crap. Dog = "God" backwards, same stuff.
> ...
> Next to Last, he says..."...Absolute with Personal Form". Again, this is pure 
> Hare Krishna bullshit, only he's cleverly eliminated saying "Supreme 
> Personality of Godhead".  Everything is "Absolute with form", if it has form. 
>  But again, apart from Scriptures, no evidence, that Krishna is THE MAN.
> ...
> Last, zeroing in on the final 2 words, "Personal Form", this is faith-based 
> on Scriptural Authority. We are to believe Krishna's "Personal Form" 
> (whatever the word they use - Viratarupa...) is somehow superior to the 
> Christian Deity?, the Mormon God, or Xenu? Tom Cruise,...where are you
> ...
> See what he's doing? He's eliminated "Supreme Personality of God", replacing 
> that with "Bhagavan", and eliminating the Hare Krishna Guru's usage of 
> "Absolute Body", or "Viratarupa", with essentially, an equally faith-based, 
> totally Scriptural assertion: That Bhagavan (Krishna) is THE Personal God 
> above other Gods, and that He's the Absolute in Personal form.
> ...
> Adi Da claimed the same thing for himself: that he was the Transcendental 
> Man, the Absolute in Personal form, blah, blah,...total rubbish. Any 
> Personality whomever is obviously "The Absolute in Personal form". Even 
> Hitler. So go figure.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Like I said, if somebody (say any Krishna Bhaktis of various stripes - 
> > > the Hare Krishna Guru, Swami Prakashanand, the fellow below...etc) claims 
> > > Krishna is the "Supreme Personality of Godhead", apart from Scriptures, 
> > > what's the evidence? 
> > 
> > 
> > You're not paying attention, Yifu and you clearly didn't read the post. He 
> > didn't claim that Krishna is the "Supreme Personality of Godhead". 
> > 
> > This is what he said:
> > 
> > "Is the Absolute dual, or is the Absolute non-dual – is the Absolute 
> > personal, is the Absolute impersonal?" And sometimes I would get very vague 
> > answers. And sometimes I would get very conflicting, combating answers 
> > against the apparent opposing side. And I was really looking to understand. 
> > 
> > "And on the path of Bhakti I found what I felt to be the synthesis of the 
> > two, and it's based on the Shrimad Bhagavatam, the Upanishads, the holy 
> > scriptures and a whole line of great saintly people who teach this 
> > principle. And I'll share with you a little piece of it.
> > 
> > "There's a beautiful verse in the Vedas (recites verse in Sanskrit then 
> > explains it as follows): There's one Absolute Truth we can call God, we can 
> > call Nirvana, but there's one Absolute Truth. 
> > 
> > And according to the Vedas, this one Absolute Truth eternally, 
> > simultaneously has three features: Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan.
> > 
> > "Brahman 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Eternal relationship with God vs Merging with the Absolute

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> Like I said, if somebody (say any Krishna Bhaktis of various stripes - the 
> Hare Krishna Guru, Swami Prakashanand, the fellow below...etc) claims Krishna 
> is the "Supreme Personality of Godhead", apart from Scriptures, what's the 
> evidence? 


You're not paying attention, Yifu and you clearly didn't read the post. He 
didn't claim that Krishna is the "Supreme Personality of Godhead". 

This is what he said:

"Is the Absolute dual, or is the Absolute non-dual – is the Absolute personal, 
is the Absolute impersonal?" And sometimes I would get very vague answers. And 
sometimes I would get very conflicting, combating answers against the apparent 
opposing side. And I was really looking to understand. 

"And on the path of Bhakti I found what I felt to be the synthesis of the two, 
and it's based on the Shrimad Bhagavatam, the Upanishads, the holy scriptures 
and a whole line of great saintly people who teach this principle. And I'll 
share with you a little piece of it.

"There's a beautiful verse in the Vedas (recites verse in Sanskrit then 
explains it as follows): There's one Absolute Truth we can call God, we can 
call Nirvana, but there's one Absolute Truth. 

And according to the Vedas, this one Absolute Truth eternally, simultaneously 
has three features: Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan.

"Brahman is the all-pervading formless, impersonal Absolute, which is... the 
realization of that Brahman is to merge with that one Absolute. 

"Paramatma is that one Supreme same Absolute who is situated within the heart 
of every living being, giving guidance, giving intuition when we actually 
connect to it. And Patanjali and many yogis really tried to connect to that 
Paramatma, that Absolute within the heart who can give power, who can give 
wisdom, who can give everything. 

And then there is Bhagawan which is the Absolute with personal form."

-


>
The Guru below appears to be more "liberal" than the Fundie Bhakti's since he's 
saying there's a certain legitimacy in accepting the impersonal Absolute in 
terms of Realization, along with Bhakti. Fine...even Ramana Maharshi was a 
devotee of Shiva and Ramakrishna was a devotee of Kali.
> ...
> However, under the cover of Absoluteness, he appears to be sneaking in a form 
> of  "Godhead" Personality worship; even though he's provided no evidence that 
> Krishna is superior to YHVH or the Scientology God Xenu. Again, there's no 
> evidence that one or the other of these "gods" is the "Supreme Personality of 
> Godhead".
> ...
> The Guru below is a Wolf in Sheep's clothing - trying to sneak in Hare 
> Krishna Fundamentalism in to the field under the cover of Brahman 
> Realization. It's a Trojan Horse. Don't fall for it.
> ...
> Either there is a "Supreme Personality of the Godhead" or there is not. But 
> should any Entity make such a claim, I would spit in His face. Goddesses such 
> as Kali and Durga are sugar and spice. The male "gods": Krishna, YHVH, 
> Ram,...appear to be self-worshipping abusers high on testosterone rather than 
> Soma.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Don't let yourself be conned by these Krishna Bhaktis. Krishna is not the 
> > > "Supreme Personality of Godhead". 
> > 
> > 
> > Nowhere in the interview was that claimed.
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > There is no such Personality, and the burden of proof apart from merely 
> > quoting Scriptures is on the claimants. 
> > >
> > 
> > So where's the proof of YOUR claim, Yufi?
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > Anybody however, is free to set up a dualist, loving relationship with one 
> > of these "gods"; whomever She/He may be.
> > > http://www.utilitarianism.com/gautama-buddha.jpg
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Excerpt transcribed from an interview Radhanath Swami gave to Rick
> > > > Archer -
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Rick Archer: I exchanged a Facebook chat with someone the other day who
> > > > had had what she called a 'non-dual' realization. If you're kind of in
> > > > tune with the current atmosphere around, there are a lot of teachers
> > > > espousing n

[FairfieldLife] Re: Eternal relationship with God vs Merging with the Absolute

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> Don't let yourself be conned by these Krishna Bhaktis. Krishna is not the 
> "Supreme Personality of Godhead". 


Nowhere in the interview was that claimed.


>
There is no such Personality, and the burden of proof apart from merely quoting 
Scriptures is on the claimants. 
>

So where's the proof of YOUR claim, Yufi?


>
Anybody however, is free to set up a dualist, loving relationship with one of 
these "gods"; whomever She/He may be.
> http://www.utilitarianism.com/gautama-buddha.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Excerpt transcribed from an interview Radhanath Swami gave to Rick
> > Archer -
> > 
> > 
> > Rick Archer: I exchanged a Facebook chat with someone the other day who
> > had had what she called a 'non-dual' realization. If you're kind of in
> > tune with the current atmosphere around, there are a lot of teachers
> > espousing non-duality and non-dual realizations and I hear very little
> > talk of God among them.
> > 
> > 
> > But in any case this girl said that, you know what, there was no sense
> > of personal self and all is one, but there was no bliss. And she said,
> > well is that all enlightenment is. It's hyped up to be this great
> > blissful thing and I'm hardly even interested now. It didn't have the
> > allure that I expected it to have.
> > 
> > I suggested to her that perhaps that little glimpse she had had was not
> > necessarily the full blossoming of what enlightenment or realization or
> > awakening can be and that she should keep persevering as there's more to
> > it.
> > 
> > I just want to throw in one more point and I want you to respond, and
> > that is that interviewing lots and lots of people, a new one every week,
> > I encounter a great number of people who don't say much or speak much of
> > God. They almost seem to think of God as a human concept, and yet they
> > have a sort of a realization, a non-dual realization of some sort. And
> > I'm always kind of needling them a bit to suggest that perhaps there's
> > further progress yet to undergo and that the whole thing will become
> > richer, fuller and more with a Divine quality to it as time goes on.
> > 
> > Very often they say, no, no, I don't see how there can possibly be any
> > further progress. So it's a pity in a way. It seems like, to me anyway,
> > it's only half the package and there's more to be known.
> > 
> > Radhanath Swami: (chuckles) You're expert, Rick, at extracting deeper
> > and deeper understanding. To be honest with you, I had the same dilemma
> > on my journey and I have written about in my book 'The Journey Home'
> > that I met people that I saw such incredible character of compassion ans
> > self-control and enlightenment.
> > 
> > 
> > And some of them were talking about the Absolute being a very
> > all-pervading impersonal experience and others, a very intimate loving
> > personal experience. And I loved my teachers in both of these schools,
> > and the many variations among these schools.
> > 
> > I was only 19 or 20 years old at the time and I was really seeking. And
> > I couldn't just accept superficial answers some people gave me when I
> > questioned. "Is the Absolute dual, or is the Absolute non-dual –
> > is the Absolute personal, is the Absolute impersonal?"
> > 
> > 
> > And sometimes I would get very vague answers. And sometimes I would get
> > very conflicting, combatting answers against the apparent opposing side.
> > And I was really looking to understand. And on the path of Bhakti I
> > found what I felt to be the synthesis of the two, and it's based on the
> > Shrimad Bhagavatam, the Upanishads, the holy scriptures and a whole line
> > of great saintly people who teach this principle. And I'll share with
> > you a little piece of it.
> > 
> > Rick: Please.
> > 
> > Radhanath Swami: There's a beautiful verse in the Vedas (recites verse
> > in Sanskrit then explains it as follows): There's one Absolute Truth we
> > can call God, we can call Nirvana, but there's one Absolute Truth. And
> > according to the Vedas, this one Absolute Truth eternally,
> > simultaneously has three features: Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan.
> > 
> > 
> > Brahman is the all-pervading formless, impersonal Absolute, which is...
> > the reali

[FairfieldLife] Eternal relationship with God vs Merging with the Absolute

[do.rflex]

Excerpt transcribed from an interview Radhanath Swami gave to Rick
Archer -


Rick Archer: I exchanged a Facebook chat with someone the other day who
had had what she called a 'non-dual' realization. If you're kind of in
tune with the current atmosphere around, there are a lot of teachers
espousing non-duality and non-dual realizations and I hear very little
talk of God among them.


But in any case this girl said that, you know what, there was no sense
of personal self and all is one, but there was no bliss. And she said,
well is that all enlightenment is. It's hyped up to be this great
blissful thing and I'm hardly even interested now. It didn't have the
allure that I expected it to have.

I suggested to her that perhaps that little glimpse she had had was not
necessarily the full blossoming of what enlightenment or realization or
awakening can be and that she should keep persevering as there's more to
it.

I just want to throw in one more point and I want you to respond, and
that is that interviewing lots and lots of people, a new one every week,
I encounter a great number of people who don't say much or speak much of
God. They almost seem to think of God as a human concept, and yet they
have a sort of a realization, a non-dual realization of some sort. And
I'm always kind of needling them a bit to suggest that perhaps there's
further progress yet to undergo and that the whole thing will become
richer, fuller and more with a Divine quality to it as time goes on.

Very often they say, no, no, I don't see how there can possibly be any
further progress. So it's a pity in a way. It seems like, to me anyway,
it's only half the package and there's more to be known.

Radhanath Swami: (chuckles) You're expert, Rick, at extracting deeper
and deeper understanding. To be honest with you, I had the same dilemma
on my journey and I have written about in my book 'The Journey Home'
that I met people that I saw such incredible character of compassion ans
self-control and enlightenment.


And some of them were talking about the Absolute being a very
all-pervading impersonal experience and others, a very intimate loving
personal experience. And I loved my teachers in both of these schools,
and the many variations among these schools.

I was only 19 or 20 years old at the time and I was really seeking. And
I couldn't just accept superficial answers some people gave me when I
questioned. "Is the Absolute dual, or is the Absolute non-dual –
is the Absolute personal, is the Absolute impersonal?"


And sometimes I would get very vague answers. And sometimes I would get
very conflicting, combatting answers against the apparent opposing side.
And I was really looking to understand. And on the path of Bhakti I
found what I felt to be the synthesis of the two, and it's based on the
Shrimad Bhagavatam, the Upanishads, the holy scriptures and a whole line
of great saintly people who teach this principle. And I'll share with
you a little piece of it.

Rick: Please.

Radhanath Swami: There's a beautiful verse in the Vedas (recites verse
in Sanskrit then explains it as follows): There's one Absolute Truth we
can call God, we can call Nirvana, but there's one Absolute Truth. And
according to the Vedas, this one Absolute Truth eternally,
simultaneously has three features: Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan.


Brahman is the all-pervading formless, impersonal Absolute, which is...
the realization of that Brahman is to merge with that one Absolute.


Paramatma is that one Supreme same Absolute who is situated within the
heart of every living being, giving guidance, giving intuition when we
actually connect to it. And Patanjali and many yogis really tried to
connect to that Paramatma, that Absolute within the heart who can give
power, who can give wisdom, who can give everything.

And then there is Bhagawan which is the Absolute with persnoal form.

Rick: The Personal aspect of God.

Radhanath Swami: Yeah, the Personal aspect of God – just like the
sun and the sunshine. The sunshine is like Brahman. It's all-pervading,
it's everywhere, it's light. And the sun is simultaneously existing with
the sunlight and the sun has form. So God simultaneously exists, but God
is infinite.

When we say that form limits God, to say that God has no form is also a
limit of God. So the Bhakti scriptures teach that the form of the Lord,
or Bhagawan is eternal, full of knowledge and full of bliss.

It's not material. It's not conceivable. Like I have eyes, and because
my eyes can only see a certain distance, my eyes are limited. So some
will say for God to be unlimited he has to have no eyes. The Bhakti
scriptures say that God has eyes but God's eyes can see all things at
all times everywhere. Now we may say, how is that possiblebut the Bhakti
scriptures say that the Absolute is beyong the limits of what we
consider possible otherwise what's the use of Him being the Absolute?

So, for those who seek this mukti, or this eternal freedom from all
suffering, from a

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 06/12/2011

[do.rflex]

Rick, that beautiful interview with Radhanath Swami answers the dilemma I've 
had for decades about 'dual' vs 'non-dual', 'personal' vs 'non-personal' - or - 
to put it another way, one's possible eternal relationship with God vs simply 
merging with the non-personal undifferentiated Absolute.

I'm very grateful that you brought out that distinction in your questions for 
him. Your interviews are very penetrating and really do get the juice out of 
the fruit!

I also very much enjoyed your fascinating interview with Julie Chimes where 
throughout her experiences, she was guided along the way in a very personal way.


>From Guru Dev:

-- God's devotee can never stay dejected. While staying in the forests, we were 
always under the all-powerful nature of Paramatman [God]. There in the dense 
forests, where no facilities for living are easily available, all the needs of 
the devotee were met by Paramatman.

How can a prince experience any need in his own Kingdom? The devotee of the 
all-powerful Lord, wherever in any of the three worlds he might be, he is the 
prince and so he will live in bliss. How can the all-powerful Lord tolerate the 
suffering of his devotee? Through one's faith, devotion and trust in Paramatman 
alone and none else, it is certain to get the Lord's attention. From then 
onwards Paramatman himself will look after the well being of the devotee. There 
will be no need to pray for one's welfare.

When the son gets sick, does he request the father have him treated and then 
the father acts? Is it so? The father will not be able to see his son suffer. 
Even without asking he will do his best to get his son cured. Thus, whosoever 
becomes Paramatman's, whosoever wrests Paramatman's love for himself, 
Paramatman, without even a request, will do what is needed. It is an 
experienced fact that Paramatman's devotee can never be unhappy.

~~ Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath
http://srigurudev.net/gurudev/discourses.html



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
>  
> 
> 
> blog updates from
> 
> 
> Buddha at the Gas Pump
> 
> 
>    
> 
> 
> published 06/12/2011
> 
> 
> 072. Radhanath Swami 
> 
>  
> 
> Jun 11, 2011 10:05 am | Rick
> 
> In 1970, at the age of only nineteen, Radhanath Swami left his home in 
> America seeking adventure and spiritual knowledge. After trekking across 
> Europe for months, he reached his long hoped for destination: India. After 
> living there for many years as a sadhu or wandering monk, he returned to 
> America in order to share the ...
> 
>    
> 072_Radhanath_Swami.mp3 
> 
>   98.7 MB
> 
> comments 
> 
>   | read more 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  Like 072. Radhanath Swami on Facebook   
> 
>  share on Google Buzz   
> 
>  
> 
>    
> Elsewhere
> 
> ·  
> 
>  Visit My Blog
> 
> ·  
> 
>  Share This with a friend
> 
> ·  
> 
>  Follow me on Twitter
> 
> ·  
> 
>  RSS feed
> 
>    
> 
>   
> 
> Regular announcement of new interviews posted at http://batgap.com.
> 
> Buddha at the Gas Pump
> 
> 1108 South B Street
> 
> Fairfield, Iowa 52556
> 
> 
> Add us to your address book 
> 
>  
> 
> Copyright (C) 2011 Buddha at the Gas Pump All rights reserved.
> 
>   
> 
>

[FairfieldLife] Asimov and those guys . . .

[do.rflex]

Asimov and those guys…
by Dennis G.

Noodling around the internet I found myself at a page  of quotations
from legendary Science Fiction writer Isaac Asimov
 . I  was
quite a fan of his work in my youth, but I haven't read him in 
years. As I was reading the quotes it seemed that he could be talking 
about our current crop of wingnuts and their twisted view of reality. 
For example:



"Anti-intellectualism has been a  constant thread winding its way
through our political and cultural life,  nurtured by the false notion
that democracy means that `my ignorance is  just as good as your
knowledge.'"
— Isaac  Asimov





"They won't listen. Do you know why?  Because they have certain
fixed notions about the past. Any change would  be blasphemy in their
eyes, even if it were the truth. They don't want  the truth; they
want their traditions."
—  Isaac  Asimov
  (Pebble in
the Sky)




"All the hundreds of millions of  people who, in their time,
believed the Earth was flat never succeeded  in unrounding it by an
inch."
— Isaac  Asimov



Now of course he wasn't talking about our current crop of wingnuts,
he  was talking about the wingnuts of his time that—while still 
crazy—maintained some grip on reality from time to time.

In our time  that grip has been lost and rejecting reality in any form
has become a  litmus test.

To be a serious contender for any office in the Tea Party  run
Republican Confederate Party you must attack reality at every 
opportunity. Word salads and fantasies are all you need. It is all a 
competition to see who can get the deepest into candyland—from
T-Paw's  insane fiscal plan
  to Santorum's  denial of science
  to
Newt's  new campaign strategy
  to Cain's  word limit on legislation 
 Rick  Perry's Day of Magic
  to well, anything Palin or Bachmann might  say—it is all
crazy town all the time.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/06/09/asimov-and-those-guys/

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> C'mon Dork, its been FIVE years since you last insulted me like that, and you 
> haven't come up with anything new in all of that time?? 
>


You haven't changed at all, Flannigan. You're still the same pathetic fraud you 
were then.



 
> That's what I meant by being stuck in the mud. Geez, at least get a little 
> bit more creative with your insults. After all I haven't called you 
> constipated and sniveling before today, so your turn, but please try to come 
> up with something fresh, K? Work at it a little. What I can't stand is a 
> spiritual jerk-off who says the same thing over and over and over again. Not 
> exactly the spirit of the moment dude.:-) 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I AM Your Worst Nightmare, Dork. LOL.:-)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > No, you're simply a pathetic fraud, Flannigan.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Yep, you are the same sniveling coward you always were. Still trying 
> > > > > to enjoy life under a rock I see. Clue: Self realization is in the 
> > > > > other direction dude, *towards* the light, not away from it.:-)
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Being a [self-proclaimed] Self Realized asshole is apparently your 
> > > > limit. You're so far away from any authentic spiritual clarity or even 
> > > > common human decency. You're an obvious fraud Flannigan.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I remember The Dork from when I was first on here. Nasty 
> > > > > > > constipated fellow and spiritual jerk-off. I see he is still 
> > > > > > > stuck in the mud too.:-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Another sterling example of the spiritually inspirational  
> > > > > > self-proclaimed "enlightenment" of Jim Flannigan. Utterly and 
> > > > > > shamefully disgusting.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ 
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is
> > > > > > > > > > > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention
> > > > > > > > > > > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on
> > > > > > > > > > > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words
> > > > > > > > > > > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here.
> > > > > > > > > > > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned
> > > > > > > > > > > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you
> > > > > > > > > > intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> > > > > > > > > > The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> > > > > > > > > > icisms of that self, or the person who always
> > > > > > > > > > does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> > > > > > > > > > have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> > > > > > > > > > to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> > > > > > > > > > as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> > > > > > > > > > not so much, I just allow those who have selves
> > > > > > > > > > to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> > > > > > > > > > for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear 
> > > > > > > > > example that
> > > > > > > > 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important 
> > > > > > > > assholes.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's 
> > > > > > > > your pain
> > > > > > > > resulting in the "rflex".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Yes, I AM Your Worst Nightmare, Dork. LOL.:-)



No, you're simply a pathetic fraud, Flannigan.



> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yep, you are the same sniveling coward you always were. Still trying to 
> > > enjoy life under a rock I see. Clue: Self realization is in the other 
> > > direction dude, *towards* the light, not away from it.:-)
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Being a [self-proclaimed] Self Realized asshole is apparently your limit. 
> > You're so far away from any authentic spiritual clarity or even common 
> > human decency. You're an obvious fraud Flannigan.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I remember The Dork from when I was first on here. Nasty constipated 
> > > > > fellow and spiritual jerk-off. I see he is still stuck in the mud 
> > > > > too.:-)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Another sterling example of the spiritually inspirational  
> > > > self-proclaimed "enlightenment" of Jim Flannigan. Utterly and 
> > > > shamefully disgusting.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is
> > > > > > > > > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention
> > > > > > > > > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on
> > > > > > > > > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words
> > > > > > > > > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here.
> > > > > > > > > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned
> > > > > > > > > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you
> > > > > > > > intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> > > > > > > > The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> > > > > > > > icisms of that self, or the person who always
> > > > > > > > does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> > > > > > > > have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> > > > > > > > to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> > > > > > > > as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> > > > > > > > not so much, I just allow those who have selves
> > > > > > > > to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> > > > > > > > for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear example 
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important 
> > > > > > assholes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's your 
> > > > > > pain
> > > > > > resulting in the "rflex".
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" raviyogi@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No need to transcend Vakradhatu, I perfectly enjoy both sanity and
> > > insanity. If you didn't waste your time being an unpaid, unnoticed,
> > > unappealing one-trick parrot of FFL you would have realized that by
> now,
> > > pity.
> > >
> >
> >
> > But, Mr Ravi, do you have the capability to consistently be a decent
> human being instead of consistently appearing as another insufferable
> 'awakened' asshole - as you always seem to do here on FFL? Your M.O.
> seems to indicate the latter. Pity.
> >
> 
> I'm not here to please anyone or change my behavior to suit someone's
> fantasies. Just out of sheer curiosity what's your protocol for being
> defined as decent and asshole anyway? I would rather be an enlightened
> asshole, whatever that means, than be a civilized, infantile pain
> projecting miserable intellectual i.e. I would rather be an authentic
> lover than an FFL Pimp (intellectual).
>


How delightfully lovely. Your deeply inspirational commentary should be 
recorded for aspirants everywhere as an example of the possibilities of 
spiritual accomplishment. Are you still on medication, Mr Ravi?

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Yep, you are the same sniveling coward you always were. Still trying to enjoy 
> life under a rock I see. Clue: Self realization is in the other direction 
> dude, *towards* the light, not away from it.:-)
> 



Being a [self-proclaimed] Self Realized asshole is apparently your limit. 
You're so far away from any authentic spiritual clarity or even common human 
decency. You're an obvious fraud Flannigan.



> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I remember The Dork from when I was first on here. Nasty constipated 
> > > fellow and spiritual jerk-off. I see he is still stuck in the mud too.:-)
> > 
> > 
> > Another sterling example of the spiritually inspirational  self-proclaimed 
> > "enlightenment" of Jim Flannigan. Utterly and shamefully disgusting.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is
> > > > > > > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention
> > > > > > > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on
> > > > > > > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words
> > > > > > > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here.
> > > > > > > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned
> > > > > > > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you
> > > > > > intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> > > > > > The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> > > > > > icisms of that self, or the person who always
> > > > > > does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> > > > > > have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> > > > > > to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> > > > > > as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> > > > > > not so much, I just allow those who have selves
> > > > > > to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> > > > > > for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear example that
> > > > 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important assholes.
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's your pain
> > > > resulting in the "rflex".
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> I remember The Dork from when I was first on here. Nasty constipated fellow 
> and spiritual jerk-off. I see he is still stuck in the mud too.:-)


Another sterling example of the spiritually inspirational  self-proclaimed 
"enlightenment" of Jim Flannigan. Utterly and shamefully disgusting.



> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is
> > > > > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention
> > > > > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on
> > > > > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words
> > > > > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here.
> > > > > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned
> > > > > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> > > >
> > > > Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you
> > > > intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> > > > The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> > > > icisms of that self, or the person who always
> > > > does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> > > >
> > > > In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> > > > have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> > > > to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> > > > as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> > > > not so much, I just allow those who have selves
> > > > to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> > > > for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear example that
> > 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important assholes.
> > >
> > 
> > Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's your pain
> > resulting in the "rflex".
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jun 10, 2011, at 6:37 PM, Ravi Yogi wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" do.rflex@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear
> example that
> > > > > 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important
> assholes.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's
> your pain
> > > > > resulting in the "rflex".
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Are you back to some semblence of sanity, Mr Ravi?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for asking Mr. "do.rflex", No I haven't,  I'm as insane as
> before but I learned a new technique since last time, it seems I can
> turn on/off my insanity and I can also adjust the insanity level
> according to the sanity levels of the person I'm dealing with
> >
> >
> > But, unfortunately, he can still not transcend his own insanity...
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> No need to transcend Vakradhatu, I perfectly enjoy both sanity and
> insanity. If you didn't waste your time being an unpaid, unnoticed,
> unappealing one-trick parrot of FFL you would have realized that by now,
> pity.
>


But, Mr Ravi, do you have the capability to consistently be a decent human 
being instead of consistently appearing as another insufferable 'awakened' 
asshole - as you always seem to do here on FFL? Your M.O. seems to indicate the 
latter. Pity.

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is
> > > > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention
> > > > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on
> > > > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words
> > > > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here.
> > > > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned
> > > > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> > >
> > > Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you
> > > intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> > > The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> > > icisms of that self, or the person who always
> > > does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> > >
> > > In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> > > have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> > > to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> > > as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> > > not so much, I just allow those who have selves
> > > to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> > > for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
> > >
> >
> >
> > Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear example that
> 'awakened' self-important assholes can still be self-important assholes.
> >
> 
> Et Tu "do"? You exceeded your 1 post limit, but I guess it's your pain
> resulting in the "rflex".
>


Are you back to some semblence of sanity, Mr Ravi?

[FairfieldLife] Speculating about CC instead of doing the work[was Re:Two...questions from Turq]

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > I agree Bozotronic Barry has pain issues, though he too is 
> > quite confused - He trumpets that he doesn't pay attention 
> > to me, thinks I am building a cult of personality here on 
> > FFL (is that weird, or what?), and then spends more words 
> > describing who he thinks I am than anyone else on here. 
> > That's messed up. Dude needs to get laid, drunk, stoned 
> > or whatever gets him off his frantic hobby horse.
> 
> Just as a hint to lurkers, who is it that you 
> intuitively feel has more 'self' going for them?
> The person who never bothers to respond to crit-
> icisms of that self, or the person who always 
> does, almost...uh...compulsively?
> 
> In this particular scenario, one of us claims to
> have "no self," but compulsively has to respond
> to every criticism of his self and his act, almost
> as if he had a 'self' to defend. The other (moi),
> not so much, I just allow those who have selves 
> to defend to do so, and allow the lurkers to think
> for themselves. Or non-selves. Whatever.  :-)
>


Flannigan, if he indeed is 'awakened', provides a clear example that 'awakened' 
self-important assholes can still be self-important assholes.

[FairfieldLife] God Caught Backing Multiple GOP Candidates for President

[do.rflex]

God Caught Backing Multiple GOP Candidates for  President
After a thorough investigation, Daily Intel has discovered that God 
is separately backing at least three different contenders for the 
Republican presidential nomination.

Over the course of the past few  months and even years, God has sent
signs and direct messages to each of  these candidates encouraging them
to run, presumably without telling  them that he supports other
candidates as well.
Herman Cain: When Cain's granddaughter was born in  1999, Cain says his
first thought upon holding her was, "What do I do to  make this a better
world?" Cain told Christian radio host Bryan Fischer  in January, "I
know that that had to be God almighty sending that  thought through my
mind." That's the background for what happened twelve  years later.


While campaigning for president around December of 2010,  Cain was
feeling tired and discouraged when he received a direct sign  from God
that he must continue. This sign was delivered via  God's preferred
method of communication, the text message:

Cain has also heard from God more directly, as he told a tea  party
rally in April
 :


Cain told the crowd about his battle with cancer in 2006, saying he's 
been "totally cancer free" for the past five years.

"You want to know why? God said, 'Not yet Herman,'" Cain told the 
crowd. "God said, 'Not yet. I've got something else for you to do.' And 
it might be to become the president of the United States of America."

Rick Santorum: But around the same time God was  encouraging Herman Cain
to run for president, he was also telling Rick  Santorum to throw his
hat in the race. As Karen Santorum told  CBN's David Brody in May
  about her husband's
decision to run for  president, "It really boils down to God's will.
What is it that God  wants? ... We have prayed a lot about this
decision, and we believe with  all our hearts that this is what God
wants."

Michele Bachmann: Meanwhile, Michele Bachmann is all but  certain
  to jump into the
race soon, and when she does, it will  signal that God has been quietly
encouraging her to run for president as  well. As Bachmann told  World
Net Daily in 2009
 , she would
never run without God's personal  endorsement:


"If I felt that's what the Lord was calling me to do, I would do it," 
she answered. "When I have sensed that the Lord is calling me to do 
something, I've said yes to it. But I will not seek a higher office if 
God is not calling me to do it. That's really my standard.

"If I am called to serve in that realm I would serve," she concluded, 
"but if I am not called, I wouldn't do it."

Bachmann recently  confirmed
  that she has, indeed,
"had that calling and that tugging  on my heart."

God hasn't been universally generous with his support. He went  out of
his way to let Mike Huckabee know that he shouldn't run for  president
 , lest he take his focus off the much more important task  of
producing a series of conservative  American history DVDs
 .


And though God arranged  for Sarah Palin to be chosen as John McCain's
running mate
 
in 2008,  there's nothing to indicate that he backs her potential
candidacy in  2012. Nevertheless, the fact that God has privately
encouraged the  candidacies of three different Republicans may cause
voters to question  whether, in reality, he really even has any
preference at all.

God could not be reached for comment by press time, because, a 
spokesman says, he was helping a baseball player hit a game-winning home
run, giving an old churchgoing lady the winning lottery numbers, making 
sure that a plane made it through the turbulence okay, helping someone 
survive a heart attack, and also, just for fun, creating a new animal 
that's like a cross between a leopard and an alligator.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/06/god_caught_backing_multiple_go.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: How The Bush Tax Cuts Blew Up The Deficit And Debt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain  wrote:
>
> Yes, but you are forgetting that low marginal tax rates are what keeps the 
> entrepenurial fires lit and makes America the massive job creation engine 
> that it is. Low marginal tax rates are the "price" we pay for incredibly low 
> unemployment and rising wages an salaries at all levels of society. :)
> 


It's amazing that so many right wingers actually STILL buy into that baloney.







> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > June 7, 2011 marks the 10th anniversary of the first of
> > President George W. Bush's two tax cuts, which have played
> > a disproportionate role in blowing up the deficit and debt.
> > 
> > As the Center for American Progress' Michael Ettlinger and
> > Michael Linden found, the federal debt would be at a sustainable
> > level today — even with the wars and the financial crisis — were it
> > not for the Bush tax cuts.
> > 
> > This short animation shows how the Bush tax cuts drove the deficit
> > and debt up and are still ruining the budget picture today.
> > 
> > Watch 1 minute animation:: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDC8pmfmYc4
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] How The Bush Tax Cuts Blew Up The Deficit And Debt

[do.rflex]

June 7, 2011 marks the 10th anniversary of the first of
President George W. Bush's two tax cuts, which have played
a disproportionate role in blowing up the deficit and debt.

As the Center for American Progress' Michael Ettlinger and
Michael Linden found, the federal debt would be at a sustainable
level today — even with the wars and the financial crisis — were it
not for the Bush tax cuts.

This short animation shows how the Bush tax cuts drove the deficit
and debt up and are still ruining the budget picture today.

Watch 1 minute animation:: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDC8pmfmYc4

[FairfieldLife] Amma the Hugging Saint's Answer to Natural Disasters and Suffering

[do.rflex]

 Sri Mata Amritanandamayi Devi, aka Amma the Hugging Saint, kicked
off  her 25th North American tour with a six-plus hour hug-a-thon in a 
suburban Seattle hotel ballroom on May 27.

There's more to Amma's bliss than just a sandalwood-scented cuddle:  her
Embracing the World charity has raised millions for global disaster 
relief, sending funds, medical supplies, food and shelter to victims of 
the 2010 Haiti earthquake, Hurricane Katrina, the 2004 Indian Ocean 
tsunami and other calamities, particularly in her native India.


In the  aftermath of the Japanese earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster
this year,  her volunteers have focused on helping the hard-hit coastal
city of Rikuzentakata
 . (Amma will  visit
Japan in late July, several months later than originally planned,  to
give the region more time to recover.)
Speaking through a translator as she continued embracing dozens of 
devotees of all ages, ethnicities and creeds, Amma expressed her views 
on natural disasters and the suffering of the innocent.
Why do natural disasters happen?

It's mainly due to our own actions that negatively affect nature. 
Destroying forests, polluting rivers, cutting down trees. We have 
disturbed the balance of nature, disturbed the balance of the earth. 
Just like a building standing on pillars: if you demolish one pillar, 
that will create an imbalance in the whole structure. We are drilling 
oil wells, we are destroying mountains, polluting rivers, cutting down 
trees. So the only way is to have a compassionate approach. Look 
inwards, within you, and try to have a compassionate approach to nature.
Our body is constituted with numerous cells. You can have some single 
cells that malfunction, and it creates an imbalance in the whole system.

But why do these bad things happen to good people?

It can only be attributed to karma. But for example, suppose there's a 
huge banyan tree filled with ripe leaves on it, and an eagle flies and 
sits on one of its branches, and all of a sudden, the leaves wither 
away. Maybe those leaves were about to be shed anyway, and it was just 
their time. So this entire universe has a rhythm to it. There's a 
harmony. There's a rhythm in every action that you can have, knowingly 
or unknowingly. Something that happens in one corner of the earth can 
have an impact on the other corner. So we are not isolated like islands.
We are all part of the universal chain. If we expect others to change 
first, nothing will happen. Instead of expecting others to change first,
we have to change first and then others will change automatically.

Do you mean karma from a past life, or something that  disaster victims
have done in this life?

Since we cannot find any reason in this birth, in this lifetime, we  can
only attribute it to the unknown past. But unless we take serious  steps
to stop this, holding discussions and dialogues about doing the  right
things, explosions like [the Japanese nuclear disaster] will keep 
happening.

Do you have any message for the Americans suffering from  natural
disasters, such as the recent tornados?

Amma is very sad about the victims. However, there's no other way  than
accept the situation we're in. There is a greater message that we 
should be more alert when dealing with nature, it should be like 
standing at gunpoint. However you should also know that this moment 
alone exists, just like any other decision, happiness is also a 
decision. Whether we laugh or cry, days will go by. So we should learn 
to laugh rather than lamenting about our past. Gather enough strength 
and courage and develop awareness.

Amma's North American tour will continue through mid-July
 ,  with
stops in San Ramon, Los Angeles, Albuquerque, Dallas, Iowa,  Chicago,
New York, Washington, D.C., Boston and Toronto.

For more on my meeting with Amma, including photos and video,  visit my 
Belief Beat blog  .

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-neroulias/amma-interview-the-huggin\
_b_868369.html

[FairfieldLife] Paranoid Fox News chief Roger Ailes

[do.rflex]

Roger Ailes' Bomb Proof Office Protects Him From 'Those Gays'Fox
News Chairman Roger Ailes is big on security. And as he sees it, 
according a report in Rolling Stone, the two biggest threats to  his
personal well-being are al-Qaeda terrorists and "those gays."
Tim Dickinson reports
   for Rolling Stone:
Murdoch installed ailes in the corner office on Fox's second  floor at
1211  Avenue of the Americas in Manhattan. The location made  Ailes
queasy: It was close to the street, and he lived in fear that gay 
activists would try to attack him in retaliation over his hostility to 
gay rights. (In 1989, Ailes had broken up a protest of a Rudy Giuliani 
speech by gay activists, grabbing demonstrator by the throat and shoving
him out the door.)

Barricading himself behind a massive mahogany desk,  Ailes insisted on
having "bombproof glass" installed in the windows -  even going so far
as to personally inspect samples of high-tech  plexiglass, as though he
were picking out new carpet.

Looking down on  the street below, he expressed his fears to Cooper, the
editor he had  tasked with up-armoring his office. "They'll be down
there protesting,"  Ailes said. "Those gays."
The magazine's massive story on Ailes in their June 9 issue also 
includes this tidbit about the time Ailes reportedly thought a 
dark-skinned janitor might be a terrorist:
Inside his blast-resistant office at Fox News headquarters,  Ailes keeps
a monitor on his desk that allows him to view any activity  outside his
closed door. Once, after observing a dark-skinned man in  what Ailes
perceived to be Muslim garb, he put Fox News on lockdown.  "What the
hell!" Ailes shouted. "This guy could be bombing me!"

The  suspected terrorist turned out to be a janitor. "Roger tore up the
whole  floor," recalls a source close to Ailes. "He has a personal
paranoia  about people who are Muslim - which is consistent with the
ideology of  his network."
Read the Rolling Stone piece here
 .

via:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/roger_ailes_bomb_proof\
_office_protects_him_from_th.php?ref=fpblg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi and Satyanand: Comments on Enlightenment Afterlife

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> I disagree. 


Then you disagree with Maharishi AND you presume that Satyanand imagined or 
fabricated his story.

If, as Maharishi stated, reaching the status of Krishna requires another series 
of incarnations into bodies finer than the physical after having achieved Unity 
Consciousness, that clearly shows that there is an individuality who has 
achieved Unity Consciousness that does all that further incarnating.

And, if indeed Guru Dev was enlightened, how could he speak to Satyanand after 
his death if he had gone out of existence?




> Accounts of various people on this forum tend to outweigh the "subtle 
> existence" option as to the official TMO dogma. (the witnesses have heard the 
> statements directly from "the Man" himself and his mouthpieces.). The 
> official dogma appears to be complete nonexistence.
> ...
> We must remember that Sat. is a direct disciple of Guru Dev, true?
> The religious orientation of the latter is geared toward devotion to the 
> "Gods"; especially various form of the Divine Mother. (thus, the name 
> "Saraswati".  If M. had called himself Maharishe Mahesh Yogi Saraswati, then 
> I would inquire if he were a devotee of that or another Goddess.
> ...
> Devotion to the "Gods" appears to be anathema to the TMO; although we all 
> know about or have read MMY's account of his own devotion to "God", Brahman. 
> (a perfectly legitimate orientation shared by Ramana although the latter used 
> the word "Self").  Muktananda says "Love God as your own Self".
> ...
> But the Paul Mason quotes of Guru Dev clearly show a place for devotion to 
> the "Gods"...i.e. especially various Divine Mother forms along with the Sri 
> Yantra as mention in Swami Rama's book.
> ...
> Apart from being nondualists, I'd say that MMY and Guru Dev lived on 
> different planets.  
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > >
> > > We are part and parcel of God, but can never be God, according to Srila 
> > > Prabhupada.  I believe MMY wanted to say the same thing to you about this 
> > > subject.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > No. The point being made here is that when one reaches Cosmic, God, or 
> > Unity Consciousness, and then dies, we DO NOT vanish into the void of the 
> > undifferentiated Absolute [as the commonly used phrase goes, "The drop 
> > becomes the ocean," suggesting that the soul vanishes as an individual 
> > soul]. 
> > 
> > In other words, the comments from both Maharishi and Satyanand clearly 
> > indicate that there is STILL an individuality after death when one is 
> > enlightened and drops the body.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I asked Maharishi at TTC [Estes Park, CO] if when we reach UC are we 
> > > > then like Krishna. He answered very quickly saying, "No, that would 
> > > > require another series of incarnations into bodies finer than the gross 
> > > > physical." He then quickly changed the subject and said nothing further 
> > > > about it.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > To further make the point that dropping the body in 'enlightenment' 
> > > > doesn't mean that one completely dissolves, here's a story that 
> > > > Brahmachari Satyanand told of his experience after the death of Guru 
> > > > Dev:
> > > > 
> > > > --Brahmachari 'Swami' Satyanand speaking c1967 about Guru Dev's 
> > > > 'nirvana'--
> > > > 
> > > > 'When in 1953 Guru Dev left this mortal frame and attained nirvana I 
> > > > was at Benares, another place of pilgrimage for Hindus, and at that 
> > > > moment I was staying in the ashram of Guru Dev.
> > > > 
> > > > Everybody knew that I am very attached to Guru Dev and devoted to Guru 
> > > > Dev, and then news came to Benares that Guru Dev has attained nirvana. 
> > > > I was sitting somewhere with a group of my friends and the news was 
> > > > relayed there.
> > > > 
> > > > When my friends heard that Guru Dev was no more they were very anxious 
> > > > about me and when they conveyed that news, they were

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi and Satyanand: Comments on Enlightenment Afterlife

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> We are part and parcel of God, but can never be God, according to Srila 
> Prabhupada.  I believe MMY wanted to say the same thing to you about this 
> subject.
> 


No. The point being made here is that when one reaches Cosmic, God, or Unity 
Consciousness, and then dies, we DO NOT vanish into the void of the 
undifferentiated Absolute [as the commonly used phrase goes, "The drop becomes 
the ocean," suggesting that the soul vanishes as an individual soul]. 

In other words, the comments from both Maharishi and Satyanand clearly indicate 
that there is STILL an individuality after death when one is enlightened and 
drops the body.



> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > I asked Maharishi at TTC [Estes Park, CO] if when we reach UC are we then 
> > like Krishna. He answered very quickly saying, "No, that would require 
> > another series of incarnations into bodies finer than the gross physical." 
> > He then quickly changed the subject and said nothing further about it.
> > 
> > 
> > To further make the point that dropping the body in 'enlightenment' doesn't 
> > mean that one completely dissolves, here's a story that Brahmachari 
> > Satyanand told of his experience after the death of Guru Dev:
> > 
> > --Brahmachari 'Swami' Satyanand speaking c1967 about Guru Dev's 'nirvana'--
> > 
> > 'When in 1953 Guru Dev left this mortal frame and attained nirvana I was at 
> > Benares, another place of pilgrimage for Hindus, and at that moment I was 
> > staying in the ashram of Guru Dev.
> > 
> > Everybody knew that I am very attached to Guru Dev and devoted to Guru Dev, 
> > and then news came to Benares that Guru Dev has attained nirvana. I was 
> > sitting somewhere with a group of my friends and the news was relayed there.
> > 
> > When my friends heard that Guru Dev was no more they were very anxious 
> > about me and when they conveyed that news, they were rather alert to 
> > appraise whatever reaction is and what happened, I simply, when I heard 
> > that news I became very sad, very sorry and I just kept my head on the 
> > table before me. And all of them were very anxious what will become of me.
> > 
> > But soon after, while I was very morose, sorrow, sad, entire world was 
> > empty for me and I did not understand what to do without Guru Dev, just a 
> > half a minute or two seconds after, a flash came and it appeared to me that 
> > Guru Dev was scolding me;
> > 
> > "What a fool you are! You have been with me for all
> > these many months and years, and you heard my discourses
> > too. Is it a moment of feeling sorry? Why should you be
> > sorry today? And you think that I am gone, where am I
> > gone?
> > 
> > "Till now whenever you wanted to meet me, you had, you
> > had to come to the place where I was, and today when I
> > have attained nirvana, I am everywhere, I am omnipresent.
> > Where have I gone?
> > 
> > "Very foolish for you to mourn on this occasion.
> > I am with you, here, there, everywhere. Why should you
> > be sorry?"
> > 
> > And the moment this flash came, my face became very brilliant, I became 
> > very cheerful. And when I raised my head, my friends who were standing 
> > there, very anxious and held in suspense, they were upset to see my 
> > brilliant and cheerful face. And then they said, "What has happened to 
> > you?" I said, "No you can't understand, nothing has happened to me, I am 
> > alright, now let me go back to the ashram and make the necessary 
> > arrangements."'
> > 
> > From: http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/Satyanand.htm
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Maharishi and Satyanand: Comments on Enlightenment Afterlife

[do.rflex]

I asked Maharishi at TTC [Estes Park, CO] if when we reach UC are we then like 
Krishna. He answered very quickly saying, "No, that would require another 
series of incarnations into bodies finer than the gross physical." He then 
quickly changed the subject and said nothing further about it.


To further make the point that dropping the body in 'enlightenment' doesn't 
mean that one completely dissolves, here's a story that Brahmachari Satyanand 
told of his experience after the death of Guru Dev:

--Brahmachari 'Swami' Satyanand speaking c1967 about Guru Dev's 'nirvana'--

'When in 1953 Guru Dev left this mortal frame and attained nirvana I was at 
Benares, another place of pilgrimage for Hindus, and at that moment I was 
staying in the ashram of Guru Dev.

Everybody knew that I am very attached to Guru Dev and devoted to Guru Dev, and 
then news came to Benares that Guru Dev has attained nirvana. I was sitting 
somewhere with a group of my friends and the news was relayed there.

When my friends heard that Guru Dev was no more they were very anxious about me 
and when they conveyed that news, they were rather alert to appraise whatever 
reaction is and what happened, I simply, when I heard that news I became very 
sad, very sorry and I just kept my head on the table before me. And all of them 
were very anxious what will become of me.

But soon after, while I was very morose, sorrow, sad, entire world was empty 
for me and I did not understand what to do without Guru Dev, just a half a 
minute or two seconds after, a flash came and it appeared to me that Guru Dev 
was scolding me;

"What a fool you are! You have been with me for all
these many months and years, and you heard my discourses
too. Is it a moment of feeling sorry? Why should you be
sorry today? And you think that I am gone, where am I
gone?

"Till now whenever you wanted to meet me, you had, you
had to come to the place where I was, and today when I
have attained nirvana, I am everywhere, I am omnipresent.
Where have I gone?

"Very foolish for you to mourn on this occasion.
I am with you, here, there, everywhere. Why should you
be sorry?"

And the moment this flash came, my face became very brilliant, I became very 
cheerful. And when I raised my head, my friends who were standing there, very 
anxious and held in suspense, they were upset to see my brilliant and cheerful 
face. And then they said, "What has happened to you?" I said, "No you can't 
understand, nothing has happened to me, I am alright, now let me go back to the 
ashram and make the necessary arrangements."'

From: http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/Satyanand.htm

[FairfieldLife] On Israel - A Proud Day for Obama

[do.rflex]

-- Obama sticks to commitment to policies that will secure
Israel's future, even at the expense of opportunistic attacks
and political controversy.

Obliquely and with respect to his audience, in his speech to
AIPAC today, President Obama also responded to Prime
Minister Netanyahu's repeated lies about what President Obama said
only the day before.

Just as no man is an island, no country can be either. On its
present course Israel is on its way to becoming a pariah state,
a status in which it cannot indefinitely or even perhaps long survive.

Neither the fact that Israel faces a profound cultural animosity
among the region's Arab populations nor the bad faith that often
greets its actions nor even the anti-Semitism that is sometimes
beneath the animus changes this essential fact. The make-up of the
21st century world is simply not compatible with a perpetual
military occupation of another people, especially one that crosses
a boundary of ethnicity and religion. Only the willfully
oblivious can't see that.

~~ Josh Marshall
More here: 
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/05/a_proud_day_for_obama.php?ref=fpblg

ALSO:

Israel's opposition leader, Tzipi Livni, reportedly backs Obama's rhetoric, and 
she chastised Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu for coming out against 
the Obama administration:

Tzipi Livni, leader of Israel's opposition Kadima party, also
backed Mr Obama's two-state solution and accused Mr Netanyahu of
putting Israel at risk in order to save his right-wing coalition.

"The prime minister has violated relations between Israel and the
United States," she said, speaking after Mr Obama's speech but
before the Oval Office meeting. "He has endangered the security of
Israel and its power of deterrence."

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/21/livni-obama-1967/