[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Im' afraid.
Is it just me?
Are all the fears of American group consciousness going to mount to
some sort of Maharishi Effect and insure that Obama gets killed
thereby? Sigh...I'm just sayin'! I feel guilty -- how's that for a
delusion of grandeur?
Here's the package that I see is all set and ready to go for this
event: the interment camps already built around the USA, cops with
new technology to handle large crowds (zap 'em with the ray guns, make
them all fall down and puke and scream, then handcuff 'em,) the
Blackwater Privatized Republican Army, and the Patriot Act.
It's all there, right? Doesn't matter if the camps are filled with
Arabs, Mexicans or, in rioting "They killed Barack" African Americans,
we'd have a civil war on our hands, right?
I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my estimate, I'll need
another 29 years of four hours a day to get my nervous system to the
point where such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it.
Obama's security lapse at his last big venue speaks to the above,
right? It was in Dallas for gawdsake.
If I were a Black American (obviously I cannot imagine such a scenario
without being a privileged white personality-with-no-clue, but go with
me here) what would I do if Obama gets killed?
How could I not think that it is simply the last straw, and that
whites will never be anything but posers who are racists to the bone?
How could I not think that "if it is never going to change, then
let's apply some of the tactics that the populations of occupied
countries have taught us?"
I lived through the Detroit riots, I know how every white hunter was
counting his deer rifles and ammo in case, you know Believe me,
it was primal, ugly, insane, and really happening.
If the world has learned anything, when the underdog has finally been
whipped so hard that he begins to bite back, he won't "play fair," and
there'll be collateral damages in every neighborhood.
I think if Obama get killed, then the gloves come off -- no more
shuffling ex-slaves getting along to get along, no more waiting for
"our black representatives in Congress to pass good laws," no more
fearing what will happen if "they send the military into our
neighborhoods," no more nothing, nope, no how -- time to kick some ass
and keep kicking it for the next 200 years of
payback's-a-bitch-for-whitey.
There's about 10 million black teens out there, and like all good
Americans, they have VIBRANT PASSION OF YOUTH and more than one gun
apiece, 9mm, jacketed ammo, Glock-o-uzzimatics donchaknow, and if The
Black Christ gets it, so will a lot of others -- starting with decent
Black Folks in the ghettos where the riots will start.
Here's the big tell: the Republicans are letting their attack dogs
hit McCain hard. Rush openly hates McCain for instance.
Why? Well, my fears say: "They have got a plan we know not of."
Another 9-11 would do, but riots in every big city would do the trick
too. Blam, Martial Law, suspension of the vote, and jack boots on
every corner -- and every night, gunfire across the land.
Please, someone talk me out of this!
Edg
PS -- Consider that the stats below show America -- white fear based
America -- to ALREADY be occupied by "possible enemy combatants."
USA Population, 299,398,484
Persons under 18 years old, 24.6%
White persons, 80.1%
Black persons, 12.8%
American Indian and Alaska Native persons, 1.0%
Asian persons, 4.4%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander,0.2%
Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, 14.8%
White persons not Hispanic, 66.4%
Foreign born persons, 11.1%
Language other than English spoken at home, 17.9%
, --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer Fri Feb 22, 5:18 PM ET
>
>
> NEW YORK - For many black Americans, it's a conversation they find
hard to avoid, revisiting old fears in the light of bright new hopes.
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
adx_U_30664="";adx_D_30664="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=14tcs4q43/M=633853.12015927.12446048.1414694/D=news/S=8903239:LREC/_ylt=AneuZP7.9lNl4agvYV4OugRH2ocA/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1203767042/L=o9L1SUWTVvqylHbpR755lhRrQ7dBeke_6uIAA6v2/B=NYTVBNj8ek8-/J=1203759842253247/A=5117002/R=0/*";adx_I_30664="";;
if(c.indexOf("adx_fc_30664")==0)eval(c)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object();
window.yzq_d['NYTVBNj8ek8-']='&U=13bla2dku%2fN%3dNYTVBNj8ek8-%2fC%3d633853.12015927.12446048.1414694%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5117002';
> They watch with wonder as Barack Obama moves ever closer to
becoming America's first black president. And they ask themselves,
their family, their friends: Is he at risk? Will he be safe?
> There is, of course, no sure answer. But interviews with blacks
across the country, prominent and otherwise, suggest that lingering
worries are outweighed by enthusiasm and determination.
> "You can't have lived through the civil rights movement a
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer Fri Feb 22, 5:18 PM ET > > > NEW YORK - For many black Americans, it's a conversation they find hard to avoid, revisiting old fears in the light of bright new hopes. Short the S&P, go long on Smith and Wesson. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d ['NYTVBNj8ek8-']='&U=13bla2dku%2fN%3dNYTVBNj8ek8-%2fC% 3d633853.12015927.12446048.1414694%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5117002'; > They watch with wonder as Barack Obama moves ever closer to becoming America's first black president. And they ask themselves, their family, their friends: Is he at risk? Will he be safe? > There is, of course, no sure answer. But interviews with blacks across the country, prominent and otherwise, suggest that lingering worries are outweighed by enthusiasm and determination. > "You can't have lived through the civil rights movement and know something about the history of African-Americans in this country and not be a little concerned," said Edna Medford, a history professor at Washington's Howard University. > "But African-Americans are more concerned that Obama get the opportunity to do the best he can," she added. "And if he wins, most of us believe the country would do for him what it would do for any president, that he will be as well protected as any of them." > Clyde Barrett, 66, a longtime U.S. Labor Department employee now retired in Tampa, Fla., says he often hears expressions of concern for Obama's safety. One young acquaintance, Barrett said, declared he wouldn't even vote for Obama for fear of exposing him to more danger. > "To me that's a cop-out, where you can't take a stand and support someone because you fear for his safety," Barrett said. "I don't have any apprehension ... We've got to go ahead and persevere." > For many older blacks, the barometer for gauging hopes and fears is the 1968 assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. > But concern about Obama's safety transcends racial lines. He has white supporters who see him as an inspiring, youthful advocate of change in the mold of Robert F. Kennedy, and they are mindful of Kennedy's assassination just two months after King's. > Pam Hart, the principal of a multiracial elementary school in the Philadelphia suburb of Cheltenham, said she is struck by the contrast between some of the black students there, innocently excited about Obama's candidacy, and the more anxious perspective of older people who lived through the violence of the 1960s. > "My 70-year-old aunt every time I call her, she says she's really afraid Obama is going to be assassinated. She is so worried that history will repeat itself," said Hart, who is 40. "I understand why she's afraid, but I feel we live in a different world now." > Bruce Gordon, a New York-based business leader and former president of the NAACP, also feels the climate has changed dramatically as evidenced by the strong nationwide support that Obama is receiving from whites as well as blacks. > Gordon felt differently back in the mid-1990s, when Gen. Colin Powell was weighing a run for the presidency, and Powell's wife, Alma, was among those voicing concern about his safety. > "When Powell decided not to run, I said to myself, 'Good,' because I thought someone would kill him," Gordon recalled. "This time, I think that if, out of fear, we keep our most talented people from running for office, it will never happen. > "Yes, there's a risk, but I would never want it to be in the way," Gordon added. "In running, Barack Obama has to accept the fact that he faces a risk. And yes, we pray for him." > Obama received Secret Service protection last May the earliest ever for any presidential candidate. At the time, federal officials said they were not aware of any direct threats to Obama, but Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin who was among those recommending the Secret Service deployment acknowledged receiving information, some with racial overtones, that made him concerned for Obama's safety. > Obama's campaign, invited this week to comment on the concerns felt by many blacks, referred to a speech given by the candidate's wife, Michelle, to a mostly black audience in South Carolina last fall. > "I know people care about Barack and our family. I know people want to protect us and themselves from disappointment," she said, before urging people to cast fear aside. "If you're willing to heed Coretta Scott King's words and not be afraid of the future ... there's no challenge we can't overcome," she said. Obama himself, while acknowledging that his family and friends are concerned about his safety, has drawn a contrast with King. "He didn't have Secret Service protection," Obama told TV host Tavis Smiley last fall. "I can't even comprehend t
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Another 9-11 would do, but riots in every big city would do the > trick too. Blam, Martial Law, suspension of the vote, and jack > boots on every corner -- and every night, gunfire across the land. > > Please, someone talk me out of this! No point in even trying. You're projecting inner fears that you don't want to look at onto external situations, which you can examine and talk about openly. But they aren't what you're really afraid of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real fears.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
"authfriend" wrote: "You're projecting inner fears that you don't want to look at onto external situations, which you can examine and talk about openly. But they aren't what you're really afraid of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real fears." Edg: Geeze Judy, now you're horning in on Peter's territory! So what if my fears create these illusions of doom? I am not unique in the least, and that's one mother of a BIG FEAR in this country which is a powerful dynamic in American group consciousness. Read the headlines. It doesn't matter, Judy, if ten million African Americans can be written off just as you've done "me;" that won't stop the bullets. Deal with the truth, will ya?, instead of trying to make the problem a "panicked Edg" thingie. Do you really not sense the incredible emotional forces in play in America right now? And, for a person who defends so much of the TM dogma, and who regards TM as a very effective-on-many-levels technique, for you, Judy, to pooh-pooh my concepts as "merely a sign of an unstable person," is, as if, providing proof that TM doesn't work to subside such fearing. If TM couldn't crack my fear structures after decades of relentless daily whackings, then, screw your straw dog, Judy, and address the real issues: interment camps, Blackwater Army, Patriot Act, core Repug's hate for McCain, and the technology for crowd control and processing. Judy, you sound like an apologist for the BigMoney status quo. I'm expecting Richard to ask you to marry him. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "authfriend" wrote: "You're projecting inner fears that you > > don't want to look at onto external situations, which you can > > examine and talk about openly. But they aren't what you're > > really afraid of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real > > fears." > > Edg: > > Geeze Judy, now you're horning in on Peter's territory! > > So what if my fears create these illusions of doom? I am not > unique in the least, and that's one mother of a BIG FEAR in > this country which is a powerful dynamic in American group > consciousness. Read the headlines. A great rishi, Sri Sri Tom Traynor-ji, once told me the meaning of fear: FEAR = False Evidence Appearing Real Jai Sri Tom!
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, Dove, you gave Judy a ten and me a nine. So my > answer to your fear question should also get a nine > and Judy's answer should get a ten. > > She is right in absolute terms. > In relative terms, she is dead wrong. When America > started torturing people, it was time to be afraid. > It always starts with the torture of people who are > far away and somehow different from us. Sooner or > later, it's your neighbor. And then it's you. Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. That's how I feel about the tax system. > > But in terms of the Absolute, there is nothing to > fear, ever. And some people are able to live that way > and make it real in their lives. My grandfather was > such a man. He stood in front of a firing squad > completely unafraid. > > > > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung > > wrote: > > > > > Another 9-11 would do, but riots in every big city > > would do the > > > trick too. Blam, Martial Law, suspension of the > > vote, and jack > > > boots on every corner -- and every night, gunfire > > across the land. > > > > > > Please, someone talk me out of this! > > > > No point in even trying. You're projecting inner > > fears that you don't want to look at onto external > > situations, which you can examine and talk about > > openly. But they aren't what you're really afraid > > of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real > > fears. > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "authfriend" wrote: "You're projecting inner fears that you > don't want to look at onto external situations, which you can > examine and talk about openly. But they aren't what you're > really afraid of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real > fears." > > Edg: > > Geeze Judy, now you're horning in on Peter's territory! > > So what if my fears create these illusions of doom? Note that I never said there's nothing to worry about in the external world. BUT you can't tell what's really worth worrying about in the external world until you stop projecting your inner fears onto it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > shempmcgurk wrote: > > Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. > > > > That's how I feel about the tax system. > > > > > So you like driving though potholes? > > BTW, I agree the tax system since I have been struggling with my > accountant's worksheet is a sham and WAY over complicated. It is > imbalanced and we paupers should pay only a token tax and let those > greedy bastards pay the bill as they seem to benefit far more than us. > Again tax them at 100% if they already have an estate of $12 million. > Who needs more? Just greedy bastards. You are, of course,completely off the mark, Barfitu, when it comes to understanding anything about taxes and how much the rich pay. THE RICH ALREADY PAY FAR, FAR MORE THAN THEY SHOULD. Table 1. Summary of Federal Individual Income Tax Data, 2005 (Updated October 2007) Number of Returns with Positive AGI AGI ($ millions) Income Taxes Paid ($ millions) Group's Share of Total AGI Group's Share of Income Taxes Income Split Point Average Tax Rate All Taxpayers 132,611,637 $7,507,958 $934,703 100.00% 100.00% - 12.45% Top 1% 1,326,116 $1,591,711 $368,132 21.20% 39.38% > $364,657 23.13% Top 2-5% 5,304,466 $1,092,223 $189,627 14.55% 20.29% 17.36% Top 5% 6,630,582 $2,683,934 $557,759 35.75% 59.67% > $145,283 20.78% Top 6-10% 6,630,582 $803,076 $99,326 10.70% 10.63% 12.37% Top 10% 13,261,164 $3,487,010 $657,085 46.44% 70.30% > $103,912 18.84% Top 11-25% 19,891,745 $1,582,445 $146,687 21.08% 15.69% 9.27% Top 25% 33,152,909 $5,069,455 $803,772 67.52% 85.99% > $62,068 15.86% Top 26-50% 33,152,909 $1,475,369 $102,256 19.65% 10.94% 6.93% Top 50% 66,305,819 $6,544,824 $906,028 87.17% 96.93% > $30,881 13.84% Bottom 50% 66,305,818 963,134 $28,675 12.83% 3.07% < $30,881 2.98% Source: Internal Revenue Service >
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Young Dove, > I think you're right to be "afraid." We use the word > "afraid" when we see something negative coming, even > when we do not personally feel any emotion of fear. > That, it seems to me, is the kind of fear you are > talking about, and to pretend that it is the personal > emotion of fear is to misread your intentions. Seems to me someone who expresses that kind of fear doesn't beg to be talked out of it, as Edg did. Nor do they say things like: "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours a day to get my nervous system to the point where such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it." Those two were the "tell"; Edg was actually being right up front about personally feeling the emotion of fear, your attempt to poohpooh it notwithstanding. It seems you didn't actually bother to read what he said; you were too anxious to get off a slam at me. Your > "fear" is the eternal vigilance that is the price of > any democracy. Yeah, boy, it's a really good thing you were so vigilant to warn us about how blacks in the United States were going to lose their right to vote if the Voting Rights Act wasn't renewed. Not to mention Michelle Obama's membership in the Council on Foreign Relations. If you hadn't told us, we'd never have known! As I told Edg, I am not, of course, suggesting that there aren't plenty of things that warrant great concern in this country; anybody who's followed my posts would know that. But there's a line between legitimate concern and irrational paranoia, and you and Edg--and Bhairitu--have crossed it repeatedly. The trouble with irrational paranoia is that it distracts one from the less spectacular, more insidious goings-on that *should* be of concern. > In Nazi Germany, too, there were the "spiritual" types > who tried to make anyone mentioning the kind of "fear" > you have expressed (and for good reason) feel > spiritually inferior for having that "fear." Oh, nice, Angela. And you became enraged when you thought (incorrectly) that I had compared you to the Nazis. (Yes, I know you're comparing me to the "good Germans," not to the Nazis, but that's almost as ugly.) If what I told Edg makes him feel "spiritually inferior," that's his problem, not mine. I don't think that at all, to the contrary. But thanks for trying to convince *him* that's what I was trying to do. What a charming person you are. For the record, I think Edg is head and shoulders above most of us here--certainly *way* above you-- in honesty and openness. It appears to me that you and Bhairitu--especially you--indulge in paranoid imaginings because it makes you feel, as Barry would say, Important and Special to be prophets of doom who make other people afraid. I don't think you do much actual worrying yourselves. I don't think that's Edg's problem. I suspect his fears may actually cause him to lose sleep, or at least to feel uncomfortable a lot of the time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Alex Stanley posts snipped: FEAR = False Evidence Appearing Real TomT: Attribution to Neale Donald Walsh, Conversations with God book 1 near the end of that volume. Tom
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours a day to get my nervous system to the point where such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it."
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can read. It's one of the things I do fairly well. Not on the evidence of many of your posts here, I'm afraid, including in this exchange. > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > > Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. > > > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > > estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours > > a day to get my nervous system to the point where > > such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it."
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Again, I see rhetoric in Edg's remarks, not real, > personal fear. Rhetoric is aware of an audience and > its relationship to that audience has been prepared > beforehand. I do not see the immediacy of real fear > in his words. I do. I don't think Edg spends a whole lot of time calculating the effect he wants his words to have on his audience. Maybe that's what you do, but I think he just sits down and lets fly with what he's feeling. That it may come out sounding like rhetoric is a function of his natural skill with words. And FYI, back in April when he was having another fit of paranoia after the Blue Angel crash, he and I had almost the same exchange: He begged readers to talk him out of it, and I responded very much as I did earlier today. He replied: "Thanks for the advice, and yes, of course it's all projection on my part. And, just so you know, I truly feel that you're not excoriating methough, sigh, I might just deserve that too. [...] "So stay tuned, sooner or later, I'm counting on you to either join my paranoia or to continue to call me on it until I can settle down and get it that my fears are driving my conclusions into ridiculousness." That time, he appeared to be able to recognize that he'd likely been projecting his own personal fears onto the external world. You might consider asking *him* whether he is experiencing real fear, rather than trying to guess.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I did not say he was calculating. Perhaps you miswrote when you said "prepared beforehand." That would seem > very far from his personality. > > > > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > > Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > Again, I see rhetoric in Edg's remarks, not real, > > > personal fear. Rhetoric is aware of an audience > > and > > > its relationship to that audience has been > > prepared > > > beforehand. I do not see the immediacy of real > > fear > > > in his words. > > > > I do. I don't think Edg spends a whole lot of time > > calculating the effect he wants his words to have > > on his audience. Maybe that's what you do, but I > > think he just sits down and lets fly with what he's > > feeling. That it may come out sounding like rhetoric > > is a function of his natural skill with words. > > > > And FYI, back in April when he was having another > > fit of paranoia after the Blue Angel crash, he and > > I had almost the same exchange: He begged readers > > to talk him out of it, and I responded very much > > as I did earlier today. > > > > He replied: > > > > "Thanks for the advice, and yes, of course it's all > > projection > > on my part. And, just so you know, I truly feel that > > you're not > > excoriating methough, sigh, I might just deserve > > that too. > > > > [...] > > > > "So stay tuned, sooner or later, I'm counting on you > > to either > > join my paranoia or to continue to call me on it > > until I can > > settle down and get it that my fears are driving my > > conclusions > > into ridiculousness." > > > > That time, he appeared to be able to recognize > > that he'd likely been projecting his own personal > > fears onto the external world. > > > > You might consider asking *him* whether he is > > experiencing real fear, rather than trying to > > guess. > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > >> I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. > >> > > > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > > estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours > > a day to get my nervous system to the point where > > such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it." > Sounds like he needs a more powerful technique rather than meditation lite. Let him have a checking and his fears will go.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > shempmcgurk wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > > >> shempmcgurk wrote: > >> > >>> Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. > >>> > >>> That's how I feel about the tax system. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> So you like driving though potholes? > >> > >> BTW, I agree the tax system since I have been struggling with my > >> accountant's worksheet is a sham and WAY over complicated. It is > >> imbalanced and we paupers should pay only a token tax and let those > >> greedy bastards pay the bill as they seem to benefit far more than us. > >> Again tax them at 100% if they already have an estate of $12 million. > >> Who needs more? Just greedy bastards. > >> > > > > You are, of course,completely off the mark, Barfitu, when it comes to > > understanding anything about taxes and how much the rich pay. > > > > THE RICH ALREADY PAY FAR, FAR MORE THAN THEY SHOULD. > > > Warren Buffer disagrees. Of course Warren Buffet disagrees; he already HAS his billions...what does HE care what the income tax rate is? Indeed, 99% of his wealth was earned at the capital gains rate, which is half the income tax rate. Plus, he's a Democrat. > Why do you care so much for the rich anyway? > You aren't one the last time I checked. Do you even have a pot to piss > in? That's precisely the point; high marginal tax rates don't hurt the rich...THEY HURT THOSE THAT ASPIRE TO BE RICH. Like you. Like me. > I'm against 10% of the population owning 90% of the wealth. I'd like to see the citation for that. I've seen contrary claims such as: 80% of the wealth is owned by the senior citizen middle class (and, no, I don't have statistics for that). > That > just isn't right. All that says is that greed has gone out of control. ...and you'd rather the government have it so that they can waste it? Better it be in the hands of the people that were capable of earning it in the first place as they can most effectively and efficiently put it to use. You cited Warren Buffet before. Well, I will now cite the richest man in the world: Carlos Slim. Upon learning that Buffet had given away $40 billion, Slim said that he could do more for society and the poor if he had invested it in new businesses and increased his wealth. > It's the 1990's "greed is a virtue" virus that got started. I think it > got started actually back about 1980 with all those TM teachers who > wanted to be "financially independent" so they could "spend more time > with Maharishi" and of course if they started making money even forgot > about meditation. A lot of them tried to hook us with Amway where I saw > the beginnings of the "greed rage" and BTW if you're not a salesman type > you probably wouldn't have made any money at that anyway. It takes a > special breed to make money off these pyramid schemes. Technically, they're called multilevel marketing. I call them the anti-Christ of Capitalism. But there's nothing wrong with greed except when the government tries to curtail it. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Sorry so many posts were wasted by you guys trying to figure out what sort/amount of emotions I'm having. Me having fears? Not so much. I'm an exaggerating hyperbolic hip-shooting writer. I glory in the way pieces of a conceptual jigsaw puzzle snap together, and when the picture forms -- it awes me every time. A sentence that works -- buttah. A lot of my posts, before being posted, are read aloud to my woman/guru/sacred-heart-magic-eight-ball/mojo-madonna, and more often than not, she'll half close her eyes and take a deep breath, and I know I'm in for it. (My list of Chopra questions got me scourged raw -- she just can't stand it when I get smarmy.) If she's up in arms, sad to say, mostly, my defensiveness comes on fully like shields coming up after the first hit from a Klingon photon torpedo. It can get really hot in this kitchen here. But, seee? She too buys into the concept that words are like rattlesnakes being juggled, but there am I like a kid in a field with his first book of matches -- with all of southern California mine to burn (cue Dr. Evil laugh.) I know so little about the power of words and am so addicted to using them. Suppose I put my attention on, say, the Blackwater Private Army. That's 150,000 more soldiers in Iraq that aren't being called soldiers. That's 150,000 elitist, mostly white guys, who are paid five times more and are better equipped than the "lower class Army troops." See? See the structures of BigMoney at work? So, oh yeah, I'm at risk. I didn't "the emotional parts" just now; I merely wrote about it, but, yep, I could do a slip-lip-slope and skid down into the darkness of some inner hell. How often? Not that often. I have had such life-challenges whack my plexus, that I have been FORCED (didn't want to do the hard work) to find a way to control my emotional production facilities enough to "not go there" when I know I would only accomplish spinning my wheels uselessly in angst slush. It's a skill I use every single day now. Saves me a lot of energy. But when I write about the Blackwater Private Army, I'm much more into "do these words convey it," than I am on "experiencing it right now." Been there, done that, now I'm printing the tee-shirt, see? I can do some very dramatic reading of my posts -- I'll do a howl that Ginsberg will envy -- he was such a crap reader, so no big accomplishment -- but I do cut an oratory rug rather finely! And, yeah, I'll be feeling a lot of the words THEN, cuz I allow voice inflections to amp my meanings, and, natch, mood making works and my heart rate will increase when thusly engaged. So, I'm working on stuff over here, but I rather talk about whether or not the world is working on ITS shit. Who cares if I'm foaming at the mouth about Bill Clinton's having fiddled while Arabs hacked African children so that the Chinese can get oil? Who cares if I'm screaming like I'm on fire when I note that Bill was spurting on a dress while 10 million Mexicans crossed the border? Who cares if I'm close to apoplectic shock with blood spurting out of my ears when I scream that BushCo has MURDERED a million innocents IN MY NAME and just keeps smirking at the press corps like Willy Sutton. Why did you invade Iraq? "Cuz that's where the oil is." It's not about me! Just because I'm a six-planet Leo borderline personality disordered narcissist and have an ego the size of Rush Limbaugh that is always trying to make EVERYTHING about me -- screw me -- instead, look at the facts about which I'm "out-of-control." It's about children getting their arms loped off and a Mexican government being allowed by GlobalBiz to be so corrupt that millions must flee the country to simply survive. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > Young Dove, > > I think you're right to be "afraid." We use the word > > "afraid" when we see something negative coming, even > > when we do not personally feel any emotion of fear. > > That, it seems to me, is the kind of fear you are > > talking about, and to pretend that it is the personal > > emotion of fear is to misread your intentions. > > Seems to me someone who expresses that kind of fear > doesn't beg to be talked out of it, as Edg did. > > Nor do they say things like: > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my estimate, > I'll need another 29 years of four hours a day to get my > nervous system to the point where such a fear is seen > clearly enough to snuff it." > > Those two were the "tell"; Edg was actually being > right up front about personally feeling the emotion > of fear, your attempt to poohpooh it notwithstanding. > It seems you didn't actually bother to read what he > said; you were too anxious to get off a slam at me. > > Your > > "fear" is the eternal vigilance that is the price of > > any democracy. > > Yeah, boy, it's a really good t
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry so many posts were wasted by you guys trying to figure out what > sort/amount of emotions I'm having. > > Me having fears? Not so much. > > I'm an exaggerating hyperbolic hip-shooting writer. I glory > in the way pieces of a conceptual jigsaw puzzle snap together, > and when the picture forms -- it awes me every time. A sentence > that works -- buttah. OK, I guess I'm just too trusting. Now that I know both you and Angela enjoy trolling, I can just dump you in the box with Willytex.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
> Now that I know both you and Angela enjoy > trolling, I can just dump you in the box > with Willytex. > Yeah, anything to avoid discussing the campaign issues! "The 2008 election is not about "the economy, stupid," or "jobs, jobs, jobs." And if, as both Clinton and Obama suggest, though Obama does it better, the election is about "change," both candidates continue in their failure to explain in any meaningful way what that means." Read more: Latino voters want a better idea of 'change' By Leslie Sanchez CNN Commentary, February 22, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/28g6cr
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Sorry so many posts were wasted by you guys trying to figure out what > > sort/amount of emotions I'm having. > > > > Me having fears? Not so much. > > > > I'm an exaggerating hyperbolic hip-shooting writer. I glory > > in the way pieces of a conceptual jigsaw puzzle snap together, > > and when the picture forms -- it awes me every time. A sentence > > that works -- buttah. > > OK, I guess I'm just too trusting. > > Now that I know both you and Angela enjoy > trolling, I can just dump you in the box > with Willytex. Amen!
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > authfriend wrote: > > As I told Edg, I am not, of course, suggesting that > > there aren't plenty of things that warrant great > > concern in this country; anybody who's followed my > > posts would know that. But there's a line between > > legitimate concern and irrational paranoia, and you > > and Edg--and Bhairitu--have crossed it repeatedly. > > > Oh really? So your smugness, what makes you think you're > anymore sane than anyone else here? Got news for you, > you're just as nuts as everyone. I didn't say anything about sanity per se, Bhairitu. I don't think indulging in the kind of conspiracy theorizing I was referring to necessarily means one is any more or less sane than anybody else.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Young Dove, I think you're right to be "afraid." We use the word "afraid" when we see something negative coming, even when we do not personally feel any emotion of fear. That, it seems to me, is the kind of fear you are talking about, and to pretend that it is the personal emotion of fear is to misread your intentions. Your "fear" is the eternal vigilance that is the price of any democracy. In Nazi Germany, too, there were the "spiritual" types who tried to make anyone mentioning the kind of "fear" you have expressed (and for good reason) feel spiritually inferior for having that "fear." And, of course, those that didn't have the "fear" were morally superior. --- Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "authfriend" wrote: "You're projecting inner fears > that you don't > want to look at onto external situations, which you > can examine and > talk about openly. But they aren't what you're > really afraid of. Only > you can get to the bottom of your real fears." > > Edg: > > Geeze Judy, now you're horning in on Peter's > territory! > > So what if my fears create these illusions of doom? > I am not unique > in the least, and that's one mother of a BIG FEAR in > this country > which is a powerful dynamic in American group > consciousness. Read the > headlines. > > It doesn't matter, Judy, if ten million African > Americans can be > written off just as you've done "me;" that won't > stop the bullets. > Deal with the truth, will ya?, instead of trying to > make the problem a > "panicked Edg" thingie. Do you really not sense the > incredible > emotional forces in play in America right now? > > And, for a person who defends so much of the TM > dogma, and who regards > TM as a very effective-on-many-levels technique, for > you, Judy, to > pooh-pooh my concepts as "merely a sign of an > unstable person," is, as > if, providing proof that TM doesn't work to subside > such fearing. If > TM couldn't crack my fear structures after decades > of relentless daily > whackings, then, screw your straw dog, Judy, and > address the real > issues: interment camps, Blackwater Army, Patriot > Act, core Repug's > hate for McCain, and the technology for crowd > control and processing. > > Judy, you sound like an apologist for the BigMoney > status quo. I'm > expecting Richard to ask you to marry him. > > Edg > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Well, Dove, you gave Judy a ten and me a nine. So my answer to your fear question should also get a nine and Judy's answer should get a ten. She is right in absolute terms. In relative terms, she is dead wrong. When America started torturing people, it was time to be afraid. It always starts with the torture of people who are far away and somehow different from us. Sooner or later, it's your neighbor. And then it's you. But in terms of the Absolute, there is nothing to fear, ever. And some people are able to live that way and make it real in their lives. My grandfather was such a man. He stood in front of a firing squad completely unafraid. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Another 9-11 would do, but riots in every big city > would do the > > trick too. Blam, Martial Law, suspension of the > vote, and jack > > boots on every corner -- and every night, gunfire > across the land. > > > > Please, someone talk me out of this! > > No point in even trying. You're projecting inner > fears that you don't want to look at onto external > situations, which you can examine and talk about > openly. But they aren't what you're really afraid > of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real > fears. > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Not to mention the trashing of the bill of rights. And President Wilson commented that he had "ruined" his country when he allowed the Federal Reserve. --- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Well, Dove, you gave Judy a ten and me a nine. So > my > > answer to your fear question should also get a > nine > > and Judy's answer should get a ten. > > > > She is right in absolute terms. > > In relative terms, she is dead wrong. When > America > > started torturing people, it was time to be > afraid. > > It always starts with the torture of people who > are > > far away and somehow different from us. Sooner or > > later, it's your neighbor. And then it's you. > > > > > Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. > > That's how I feel about the tax system. > > > > > > > > But in terms of the Absolute, there is nothing to > > fear, ever. And some people are able to live that > way > > and make it real in their lives. My grandfather > was > > such a man. He stood in front of a firing squad > > completely unafraid. > > > > > > > > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Another 9-11 would do, but riots in every big > city > > > would do the > > > > trick too. Blam, Martial Law, suspension of > the > > > vote, and jack > > > > boots on every corner -- and every night, > gunfire > > > across the land. > > > > > > > > Please, someone talk me out of this! > > > > > > No point in even trying. You're projecting inner > > > fears that you don't want to look at onto > external > > > situations, which you can examine and talk about > > > openly. But they aren't what you're really > afraid > > > of. Only you can get to the bottom of your real > > > fears. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Duveyoung wrote: > Im' afraid. > > Is it just me? Don't be afraid. Be angry. That's what has happened is you've had your safe country stolen away from you by a bunch felonious traitors. Take it back. We're much smarter than they are and if we put our collective heads together we can take them down and return the planet to sanity. Isn't that what meditating was about anyway?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
shempmcgurk wrote: > Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. > > That's how I feel about the tax system. > > So you like driving though potholes? BTW, I agree the tax system since I have been struggling with my accountant's worksheet is a sham and WAY over complicated. It is imbalanced and we paupers should pay only a token tax and let those greedy bastards pay the bill as they seem to benefit far more than us. Again tax them at 100% if they already have an estate of $12 million. Who needs more? Just greedy bastards.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
shempmcgurk wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> shempmcgurk wrote: >> >>> Yes, Angela, torture is indeed a slippery slope. >>> >>> That's how I feel about the tax system. >>> >>> >>> >> So you like driving though potholes? >> >> BTW, I agree the tax system since I have been struggling with my >> accountant's worksheet is a sham and WAY over complicated. It is >> imbalanced and we paupers should pay only a token tax and let those >> greedy bastards pay the bill as they seem to benefit far more than us. >> Again tax them at 100% if they already have an estate of $12 million. >> Who needs more? Just greedy bastards. >> > > You are, of course,completely off the mark, Barfitu, when it comes to > understanding anything about taxes and how much the rich pay. > > THE RICH ALREADY PAY FAR, FAR MORE THAN THEY SHOULD. > Warren Buffer disagrees. Why do you care so much for the rich anyway? You aren't one the last time I checked. Do you even have a pot to piss in? I'm against 10% of the population owning 90% of the wealth. That just isn't right. All that says is that greed has gone out of control. It's the 1990's "greed is a virtue" virus that got started. I think it got started actually back about 1980 with all those TM teachers who wanted to be "financially independent" so they could "spend more time with Maharishi" and of course if they started making money even forgot about meditation. A lot of them tried to hook us with Amway where I saw the beginnings of the "greed rage" and BTW if you're not a salesman type you probably wouldn't have made any money at that anyway. It takes a special breed to make money off these pyramid schemes.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Young Dove, > > I think you're right to be "afraid." We use the > word > > "afraid" when we see something negative coming, > even > > when we do not personally feel any emotion of > fear. > > That, it seems to me, is the kind of fear you are > > talking about, and to pretend that it is the > personal > > emotion of fear is to misread your intentions. > > Seems to me someone who expresses that kind of fear > doesn't beg to be talked out of it, as Edg did. > > Nor do they say things like: > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > estimate, > I'll need another 29 years of four hours a day to > get my > nervous system to the point where such a fear is > seen > clearly enough to snuff it." > > Those two were the "tell"; Edg was actually being > right up front about personally feeling the emotion > of fear, your attempt to poohpooh it > notwithstanding. > It seems you didn't actually bother to read what he > said; you were too anxious to get off a slam at me. > > Your > > "fear" is the eternal vigilance that is the price > of > > any democracy. > > Yeah, boy, it's a really good thing you were so > vigilant to warn us about how blacks in the United > States were going to lose their right to vote if > the Voting Rights Act wasn't renewed. Not to mention > Michelle Obama's membership in the Council on > Foreign > Relations. If you hadn't told us, we'd never have > known! > > > > As I told Edg, I am not, of course, suggesting that > there aren't plenty of things that warrant great > concern in this country; anybody who's followed my > posts would know that. But there's a line between > legitimate concern and irrational paranoia, and you > and Edg--and Bhairitu--have crossed it repeatedly. > > The trouble with irrational paranoia is that it > distracts one from the less spectacular, more > insidious goings-on that *should* be of concern. > > > In Nazi Germany, too, there were the "spiritual" > types > > who tried to make anyone mentioning the kind of > "fear" > > you have expressed (and for good reason) feel > > spiritually inferior for having that "fear." > > Oh, nice, Angela. And you became enraged when you > thought (incorrectly) that I had compared you to > the Nazis. (Yes, I know you're comparing me to the > "good Germans," not to the Nazis, but that's almost > as ugly.) > > If what I told Edg makes him feel "spiritually > inferior," that's his problem, not mine. I don't > think that at all, to the contrary. But thanks > for trying to convince *him* that's what I was > trying to do. What a charming person you are. > > For the record, I think Edg is head and shoulders > above most of us here--certainly *way* above you-- > in honesty and openness. > > It appears to me that you and Bhairitu--especially > you--indulge in paranoid imaginings because it > makes you feel, as Barry would say, Important and > Special to be prophets of doom who make other people > afraid. I don't think you do much actual worrying > yourselves. > > I don't think that's Edg's problem. I suspect his > fears may actually cause him to lose sleep, or at > least to feel uncomfortable a lot of the time. > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:05 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety' >A lot of them tried to hook us with Amway where I saw the beginnings of the "greed rage" and BTW if you're not a salesman type you probably wouldn't have made any money at that anyway. It takes a special breed to make money off these pyramid schemes. Andy Rymer was at the top of that pyramid, in the movement anyway. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9/1294 - Release Date: 2/22/2008 6:39 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
I can read. It's one of the things I do fairly well. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours > a day to get my nervous system to the point where > such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it." > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. >> > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four hours > a day to get my nervous system to the point where > such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it." Sounds like he needs a more powerful technique rather than meditation lite.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
Again, I see rhetoric in Edg's remarks, not real, personal fear. Rhetoric is aware of an audience and its relationship to that audience has been prepared beforehand. I do not see the immediacy of real fear in his words. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I can read. It's one of the things I do fairly > well. > > Not on the evidence of many of your posts here, > I'm afraid, including in this exchange. > > > > > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > > > Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I see no real fear in Edg's rhetoric. > > > > > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > > > estimate, I'll need another 29 years of four > hours > > > a day to get my nervous system to the point > where > > > such a fear is seen clearly enough to snuff it." > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
I did not say he was calculating. That would seem very far from his personality. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Again, I see rhetoric in Edg's remarks, not real, > > personal fear. Rhetoric is aware of an audience > and > > its relationship to that audience has been > prepared > > beforehand. I do not see the immediacy of real > fear > > in his words. > > I do. I don't think Edg spends a whole lot of time > calculating the effect he wants his words to have > on his audience. Maybe that's what you do, but I > think he just sits down and lets fly with what he's > feeling. That it may come out sounding like rhetoric > is a function of his natural skill with words. > > And FYI, back in April when he was having another > fit of paranoia after the Blue Angel crash, he and > I had almost the same exchange: He begged readers > to talk him out of it, and I responded very much > as I did earlier today. > > He replied: > > "Thanks for the advice, and yes, of course it's all > projection > on my part. And, just so you know, I truly feel that > you're not > excoriating methough, sigh, I might just deserve > that too. > > [...] > > "So stay tuned, sooner or later, I'm counting on you > to either > join my paranoia or to continue to call me on it > until I can > settle down and get it that my fears are driving my > conclusions > into ridiculousness." > > That time, he appeared to be able to recognize > that he'd likely been projecting his own personal > fears onto the external world. > > You might consider asking *him* whether he is > experiencing real fear, rather than trying to > guess. > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
this is not worth arguing about and I could be wrong about Edg and his fear. As for rhetorical language, it is true that it is not easy to characterize the relationship between conscious and subliminal aspects of the process of writing. "Prepared beforehand" does not mean "calculating," nor does it imply any kind of phoniness. But, as I said, this is not worth arguing about. --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I did not say he was calculating. > > Perhaps you miswrote when you said "prepared > beforehand." > > That would seem > > very far from his personality. > > > > > > > > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > > > Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Again, I see rhetoric in Edg's remarks, not > real, > > > > personal fear. Rhetoric is aware of an > audience > > > and > > > > its relationship to that audience has been > > > prepared > > > > beforehand. I do not see the immediacy of > real > > > fear > > > > in his words. > > > > > > I do. I don't think Edg spends a whole lot of > time > > > calculating the effect he wants his words to > have > > > on his audience. Maybe that's what you do, but I > > > think he just sits down and lets fly with what > he's > > > feeling. That it may come out sounding like > rhetoric > > > is a function of his natural skill with words. > > > > > > And FYI, back in April when he was having > another > > > fit of paranoia after the Blue Angel crash, he > and > > > I had almost the same exchange: He begged > readers > > > to talk him out of it, and I responded very much > > > as I did earlier today. > > > > > > He replied: > > > > > > "Thanks for the advice, and yes, of course it's > all > > > projection > > > on my part. And, just so you know, I truly feel > that > > > you're not > > > excoriating methough, sigh, I might just > deserve > > > that too. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > "So stay tuned, sooner or later, I'm counting on > you > > > to either > > > join my paranoia or to continue to call me on it > > > until I can > > > settle down and get it that my fears are driving > my > > > conclusions > > > into ridiculousness." > > > > > > That time, he appeared to be able to recognize > > > that he'd likely been projecting his own > personal > > > fears onto the external world. > > > > > > You might consider asking *him* whether he is > > > experiencing real fear, rather than trying to > > > guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
authfriend wrote: > As I told Edg, I am not, of course, suggesting that > there aren't plenty of things that warrant great > concern in this country; anybody who's followed my > posts would know that. But there's a line between > legitimate concern and irrational paranoia, and you > and Edg--and Bhairitu--have crossed it repeatedly. > Oh really? So your smugness, what makes you think you're anymore sane than anyone else here? Got news for you, you're just as nuts as everyone. Because: Nobody is sane, they just think they are. Nobody is stable, they just think they are. Humans are just a viral growth on the planet. They aren't really intelligent, they just think they are. :D Get over it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
shempmcgurk wrote: >>> THE RICH ALREADY PAY FAR, FAR MORE THAN THEY SHOULD. >>> >>> >> Warren Buffer disagrees. >> > > > Of course Warren Buffet disagrees; he already HAS his billions...what > does HE care what the income tax rate is? > > He pointed out that his secretary pays a greater percentage in taxes than he does and felt that was wrong. > Indeed, 99% of his wealth was earned at the capital gains rate, which > is half the income tax rate. > > Plus, he's a Democrat. > So? Boy haven't the Republicans done wonders in the last few years? How much of the bill for the Iraq mess do you owe? >> Why do you care so much for the rich anyway? >> You aren't one the last time I checked. Do you even have a pot to >> > piss > >> in? >> > > > That's precisely the point; high marginal tax rates don't hurt the > rich...THEY HURT THOSE THAT ASPIRE TO BE RICH. > Fine, just what I was arguing. Lower the rates for those earning less than $200K a year and raise it on those already obese with wealth. They need to be put on a money diet. > Like you. > > Like me. > Ever made enough to see half your pay check disappear? >> I'm against 10% of the population owning 90% of the wealth. >> > > > > I'd like to see the citation for that. > > Do a search then. Just on that line I got lots from Google and some studies from economists. That's a rouge figure of course but what I heard Thom Hartmann mention the other day. Some say 10% own 85% but that the percentage is rising. >> That >> just isn't right. All that says is that greed has gone out of >> > control. > > > ...and you'd rather the government have it so that they can waste it? > No. They sure have wasted it in Iraq though, haven't they? That's the point though. We own the government. They're our dogs. Reign them in. Here in California we just told the state assembly once again they can't take our gasoline taxes and spend them elsewhere as they have in the past. We pay those to have our roads in good shape not something else. > Better it be in the hands of the people that were capable of earning > it in the first place as they can most effectively and efficiently > put it to use. > > You cited Warren Buffet before. Well, I will now cite the richest > man in the world: Carlos Slim. Upon learning that Buffet had given > away $40 billion, Slim said that he could do more for society and the > poor if he had invested it in new businesses and increased his wealth. > And he's wrong and Mexicans can be quite corrupt. > But there's nothing wrong with greed except when the government tries > to curtail it. > > Well get used to it because the blowback is about to come. Enjoy the rest of your life in well deserved socialism. :D
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
I see your love for language and writing, Dove, and love it when I see it. --- Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry so many posts were wasted by you guys trying > to figure out what > sort/amount of emotions I'm having. > > Me having fears? Not so much. > > I'm an exaggerating hyperbolic hip-shooting writer. > I glory in the > way pieces of a conceptual jigsaw puzzle snap > together, and when the > picture forms -- it awes me every time. A sentence > that works -- buttah. > > A lot of my posts, before being posted, are read > aloud to my > woman/guru/sacred-heart-magic-eight-ball/mojo-madonna, > and more often > than not, she'll half close her eyes and take a deep > breath, and I > know I'm in for it. (My list of Chopra questions > got me scourged raw > -- she just can't stand it when I get smarmy.) If > she's up in arms, > sad to say, mostly, my defensiveness comes on fully > like shields > coming up after the first hit from a Klingon photon > torpedo. It can > get really hot in this kitchen here. > > But, seee? She too buys into the concept that words > are like > rattlesnakes being juggled, but there am I like a > kid in a field with > his first book of matches -- with all of southern > California mine to > burn (cue Dr. Evil laugh.) I know so little about > the power of words > and am so addicted to using them. > > Suppose I put my attention on, say, the Blackwater > Private Army. > > That's 150,000 more soldiers in Iraq that aren't > being called soldiers. > > That's 150,000 elitist, mostly white guys, who are > paid five times > more and are better equipped than the "lower class > Army troops." > > See? See the structures of BigMoney at work? So, > oh yeah, I'm at > risk. I didn't "the emotional parts" just now; I > merely wrote about > it, but, yep, I could do a slip-lip-slope and skid > down into the > darkness of some inner hell. > > How often? Not that often. I have had such > life-challenges whack my > plexus, that I have been FORCED (didn't want to do > the hard work) to > find a way to control my emotional production > facilities enough to > "not go there" when I know I would only accomplish > spinning my wheels > uselessly in angst slush. It's a skill I use every > single day now. > Saves me a lot of energy. > > But when I write about the Blackwater Private Army, > I'm much more into > "do these words convey it," than I am on > "experiencing it right now." > Been there, done that, now I'm printing the > tee-shirt, see? > > I can do some very dramatic reading of my posts -- > I'll do a howl that > Ginsberg will envy -- he was such a crap reader, so > no big > accomplishment -- but I do cut an oratory rug rather > finely! And, > yeah, I'll be feeling a lot of the words THEN, cuz I > allow voice > inflections to amp my meanings, and, natch, mood > making works and my > heart rate will increase when thusly engaged. > > So, I'm working on stuff over here, but I rather > talk about whether or > not the world is working on ITS shit. > > Who cares if I'm foaming at the mouth about Bill > Clinton's having > fiddled while Arabs hacked African children so that > the Chinese can > get oil? > > Who cares if I'm screaming like I'm on fire when I > note that Bill was > spurting on a dress while 10 million Mexicans > crossed the border? > > Who cares if I'm close to apoplectic shock with > blood spurting out of > my ears when I scream that BushCo has MURDERED a > million innocents IN > MY NAME and just keeps smirking at the press corps > like Willy Sutton. > Why did you invade Iraq? "Cuz that's where the oil > is." > > It's not about me! Just because I'm a six-planet > Leo borderline > personality disordered narcissist and have an ego > the size of Rush > Limbaugh that is always trying to make EVERYTHING > about me -- screw me > -- instead, look at the facts about which I'm > "out-of-control." > > It's about children getting their arms loped off and > a Mexican > government being allowed by GlobalBiz to be so > corrupt that millions > must flee the country to simply survive. > > Edg > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > Young Dove, > > > I think you're right to be "afraid." We use the > word > > > "afraid" when we see something negative coming, > even > > > when we do not personally feel any emotion of > fear. > > > That, it seems to me, is the kind of fear you > are > > > talking about, and to pretend that it is the > personal > > > emotion of fear is to misread your intentions. > > > > Seems to me someone who expresses that kind of > fear > > doesn't beg to be talked out of it, as Edg did. > > > > Nor do they say things like: > > > > "I'm afraid. Yeah, I need a checking, but by my > estimate, > > I'll need another 29 years of four hours a day to > get my > > nervous system to the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Many Worry about Sen. Obama's Safety'
authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> authfriend wrote: >> >>> As I told Edg, I am not, of course, suggesting that >>> there aren't plenty of things that warrant great >>> concern in this country; anybody who's followed my >>> posts would know that. But there's a line between >>> legitimate concern and irrational paranoia, and you >>> and Edg--and Bhairitu--have crossed it repeatedly. >>> >>> >> Oh really? So your smugness, what makes you think you're >> anymore sane than anyone else here? Got news for you, >> you're just as nuts as everyone. >> > > I didn't say anything about sanity per se, Bhairitu. > I don't think indulging in the kind of conspiracy > theorizing I was referring to necessarily means one is > any more or less sane than anybody else. Nor paranoid either.
