Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Dr. Storms and Jed, it is not painful for me to discuss this. Knowing the enemy is half the battle. This condition becomes somewhat dangerous when the person does not recognize what they are doing and have moved into a position of power. It seems this chrismatic "skill" lends itself to the political arena. I suspect many politicians have this condition in various degrees. Believing in what you say is a very powerful communications tool, and is very difficult to fake unless you are an actor or possess this ADD "confabulating" mechanism. We are the type of people that are "most" productive when kept behind a locked door and tossed a pizza every now and then. We most definitely think outside the box, in part due to the memory linkage errors, and can be extremely creative ... but not predictable. Our type definitely has a place in society just not in a position of power or authority. If asked how we arrive at "C" we cannot outline the steps A and B because for the most part our behavior is intuitive (which can be dangerous). I have seen this behavior pattern in President Bush's arguments many times. Another one of the flags for this condition is the simple child like humor that President Bush exhibits on many occasions. I also possess this hard to suppress drive to make somewhat crude jokes at another person's expense. This is just part of the ADD package. Anyone on this list who would like deeper insights into the ADD mindset; feel free to ask me (off list, if desired), this is one subject I am an expert at. One last comment, most ADD personalities can be "handled" easily by people who know what they are doing. We do not want this type of person as president or vice president. However; they are extremely effective at bringing in the votes. This is our "oxymoron" for the day. -DonW- - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 11:56 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads DonW wrote: "Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question." Both of the above are major *FLAGS* for ADHD. I should know .. I have this condition. . . . These people can be very chrismatic, are experts at circular logic and usually pathological liars. When they are unscripted, they have major issues with memory LINKAGE. They have the memories but have delayed access to them, usually minutes - hours - days after needed. This results in a subconscious effort to fill in the memory holes; hence the pathological lies. Wow. Thanks for discussion what must be a painful thing to deal with. The process of filling in "memory holes" -- as you call them -- is observed in other conditions, such as long term memory loss. An extreme example was described by Oliver Sacks for a patient with Korsakov's syndrome (amnesic-confabulatory syndrome). It is not lying because the person momentarily believes the statements are true. It is "confabulating." Sacks also describes holes: [The patient] remembered nothing for more than a few seconds. He was continually disoriented. Abysses of amnesia continually open beneath him, but he would bridge them, nimbly, by fluid confabulations and fictions all kinds. For him they were not fictions, but how he suddenly saw, or interpreted, the world. . . . So far as he was concerned, there was nothing the matter . . . - "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for Hat," p. 109 Since they believe in what they are saying (at the moment), and the "memory fills" are tailored to the event/person in front of them, they can be chrismatic. Yes. That's what Sacks and others say. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1710 - Release Date: 10/6/2008 9:23 AM
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
On on Vortex can we turn an "Off Topic Thread" thread to science. Congratulations! Terry On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > DonW wrote: > > "Several former rivals have pointed to her > uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when > she can't answer a question." > > Both of the above are major *FLAGS* for ADHD. I should know .. I have this > condition. . . . > > These people can be very chrismatic, are experts at circular logic and > usually pathological liars. > > When they are unscripted, they have major issues with memory LINKAGE. They > have the memories but have delayed access to them, usually minutes - hours - > days after needed. This results in a subconscious effort to fill in the > memory holes; hence the pathological lies. > > Wow. Thanks for discussion what must be a painful thing to deal with. > > The process of filling in "memory holes" -- as you call them -- is observed > in other conditions, such as long term memory loss. An extreme example was > described by Oliver Sacks for a patient with Korsakov's syndrome > (amnesic-confabulatory syndrome). It is not lying because the person > momentarily believes the statements are true. It is "confabulating." Sacks > also describes holes: > > [The patient] remembered nothing for more than a few seconds. He was > continually disoriented. Abysses of amnesia continually open beneath him, > but he would bridge them, nimbly, by fluid confabulations and fictions all > kinds. For him they were not fictions, but how he suddenly saw, or > interpreted, the world. . . . So far as he was concerned, there was nothing > the matter . . . > > - "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for Hat," p. 109 > > > Since they believe in what they are saying (at the moment), and the "memory > fills" are tailored to the event/person in front of them, they can be > chrismatic. > > Yes. That's what Sacks and others say. > > - Jed >
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
DonW wrote: "Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question." Both of the above are major *FLAGS* for ADHD. I should know .. I have this condition. . . . These people can be very chrismatic, are experts at circular logic and usually pathological liars. When they are unscripted, they have major issues with memory LINKAGE. They have the memories but have delayed access to them, usually minutes - hours - days after needed. This results in a subconscious effort to fill in the memory holes; hence the pathological lies. Wow. Thanks for discussion what must be a painful thing to deal with. The process of filling in "memory holes" -- as you call them -- is observed in other conditions, such as long term memory loss. An extreme example was described by Oliver Sacks for a patient with Korsakov's syndrome (amnesic-confabulatory syndrome). It is not lying because the person momentarily believes the statements are true. It is "confabulating." Sacks also describes holes: [The patient] remembered nothing for more than a few seconds. He was continually disoriented. Abysses of amnesia continually open beneath him, but he would bridge them, nimbly, by fluid confabulations and fictions all kinds. For him they were not fictions, but how he suddenly saw, or interpreted, the world. . . . So far as he was concerned, there was nothing the matter . . . - "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for Hat," p. 109 Since they believe in what they are saying (at the moment), and the "memory fills" are tailored to the event/person in front of them, they can be chrismatic. Yes. That's what Sacks and others say. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Thanks for the information Don. Obviously people can function very well with ADD under most circumstances. In fact, we all have a little of this problem. The question is, does a president with this problem function well? Bush answered this question very clearly with a NO answer. As a result their problems, both Bush and Palin are ridiculed and made the object of jokes. Is this the kind of person we want to again represent our country? Both people would be successful in another kind of job and certainly are likable, but should they be in public office? So, I would like the Republicans on this list to explain why they continue to support the McCain ticket in view of this obvious limitation of Palin and the poor judgement this choice represents for McCain? At the present time, I suggest this question is much more important than any that can be asked about science. Ed On Oct 3, 2008, at 6:15 PM, DonW wrote: "Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush." "Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question." Both of the above are major *FLAGS* for ADHD. I should know .. I have this condition. I have long suspected that Prez Bush and Bill Gates have ADD. These people can be very chrismatic, are experts at circular logic and usually pathological liars. When they are unscripted, they have major issues with memory LINKAGE. They have the memories but have delayed access to them, usually minutes - hours - days after needed. This results in a subconscious effort to fill in the memory holes; hence the pathological lies. Since they believe in what they are saying (at the moment), and the "memory fills" are tailored to the event/person in front of them, they can be chrismatic. http://www.attentiondeficit-add-adhd.com/famous-people-with-ADHD.html http://www.greatschools.net/cgi-bin/showarticle/2258 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder -DonW- - Original Message - From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 12:46 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads Edmund Storms wrote: Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush. Very similar. I have not seen this before. Bush and Palin are both smart in many ways, but they are incurious, unorganized and incapable of expressing coherent thought. Also, you might say they have no respect for facts. Palin was described in the Atlanta Journal the other day: ". . . many Alaska political observers have advised against underestimating her. Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question. Andrew Halcro, who lost the governor's race to Palin in 2006, wrote in the Anchorage Daily News last week that she was unintimidated by his mastery of policy details. 'Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers and yet when asked questions you spout off facts, figures and policies and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of that matter?' ' he recalls Palin telling him after a debate. . . ." http://www.ajc.com/search/content/opinion/stories/2008/10/01/tucked.html The Bush administration's contempt for facts was made famous by this quote: "The aide [who was upset with the author] said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html This contempt for facts is typical of anti-cold fusion people as well. See also Altemyer's web site on Authoritarian thought processes: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
"Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush." "Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question." Both of the above are major *FLAGS* for ADHD. I should know .. I have this condition. I have long suspected that Prez Bush and Bill Gates have ADD. These people can be very chrismatic, are experts at circular logic and usually pathological liars. When they are unscripted, they have major issues with memory LINKAGE. They have the memories but have delayed access to them, usually minutes - hours - days after needed. This results in a subconscious effort to fill in the memory holes; hence the pathological lies. Since they believe in what they are saying (at the moment), and the "memory fills" are tailored to the event/person in front of them, they can be chrismatic. http://www.attentiondeficit-add-adhd.com/famous-people-with-ADHD.html http://www.greatschools.net/cgi-bin/showarticle/2258 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder -DonW- - Original Message - From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 12:46 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads Edmund Storms wrote: Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush. Very similar. I have not seen this before. Bush and Palin are both smart in many ways, but they are incurious, unorganized and incapable of expressing coherent thought. Also, you might say they have no respect for facts. Palin was described in the Atlanta Journal the other day: ". . . many Alaska political observers have advised against underestimating her. Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question. Andrew Halcro, who lost the governor's race to Palin in 2006, wrote in the Anchorage Daily News last week that she was unintimidated by his mastery of policy details. 'Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers and yet when asked questions you spout off facts, figures and policies and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of that matter?' ' he recalls Palin telling him after a debate. . . ." http://www.ajc.com/search/content/opinion/stories/2008/10/01/tucked.html The Bush administration's contempt for facts was made famous by this quote: "The aide [who was upset with the author] said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html This contempt for facts is typical of anti-cold fusion people as well. See also Altemyer's web site on Authoritarian thought processes: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Jed Rothwell wrote: > The Bush administration's contempt for facts was made famous by this quote: > > "The aide [who was upset with the author] said that guys like me were > 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as > people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of > discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about > enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the > way the world really works anymore,' he continued. ''We're an empire > now, and when we act, we create our own reality. Straight from George Orwell: He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future. The trouble is, it's not true. There is an objective reality, and those who forget that are in danger of running headlong into it. Here's a related quote, this time from an engineer regarding design of the data paths between boards in a computer: "You may ignore the need for a ground return. Mother Nature won't care, she'll gladly provide one for you. But the ground return she provides may not be one you like." You can play "let's pretend" for a very long time, like the Soviet Union did. They pretended to be profitable, and they were so big, and so secretive, that nobody could gainsay them. But in reality -- the objective, it's-really-out-there reality, the one that can be so hard to pin down -- they were operating their overseas empire at a loss. You can operate with negative cash flow for a very long time if you're big enough but you can't do it forever, and they finally went broke. In China, the sleazoids running the show were less enamored of their own vision than the leaders in Russia, and saw what was happening, and started making decisions based on reality. And that's how we got the China we have today, which is a capitalist oligarchy (and disgusting), and no longer "communist" in any meaningful sense of the term. (Not that they were any less disgusting under Mao...) If the United States continues to be run by people who operate as if there is no reality out there, the end result will not be beneficial to the United States.
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
On Oct 3, 2008, at 8:09 AM, thomas malloy wrote: ...I just deleated the whole Evolution of Good Government thread, and the secrecy thread too. I'm a mere 766 messages behind in reading vortex. I barely have time to do science or even do my daily chores. No time to read political views. How about someone looking at the video on the website linked in that energy from air link that I posted, and then lets have a discussion about Respines, or induced LENR's or, anything but the Bailout Bill, of who won the VP debate. If you want people to look then I would suggest you be courteous enough to post the URL for any references you make. If it is not worth your time to find one then it certainly isn't worth every one else's effort duplicated n-fold. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
I see this characteristic in many faith-based people. Having faith reduces the strain on the logical brain and allows a person who is lacking logic to function. The rules and decisions are made by the religious leaders. However, we see in Bush what havoc a nonlogical thinker can create. Unfortunately, the nonlogical thinker does not have the ability to make the logical connection between Bush and the result. In the process of this election, we are seeing the population separate itself into faith-based (or emotion-based) and logic-based thinking. Bush and Palin seem to be about 10% logic, McCain seems about 50% logic while Obama is nearly 95% logic. We shall see which form of thinking has the genetic upper-hand in the population. Ed On Oct 3, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush. Very similar. I have not seen this before. Bush and Palin are both smart in many ways, but they are incurious, unorganized and incapable of expressing coherent thought. Also, you might say they have no respect for facts. Palin was described in the Atlanta Journal the other day: ". . . many Alaska political observers have advised against underestimating her. Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question. Andrew Halcro, who lost the governor's race to Palin in 2006, wrote in the Anchorage Daily News last week that she was unintimidated by his mastery of policy details. 'Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers and yet when asked questions you spout off facts, figures and policies and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of that matter?' ' he recalls Palin telling him after a debate. . . ." http://www.ajc.com/search/content/opinion/stories/2008/10/01/tucked.html The Bush administration's contempt for facts was made famous by this quote: "The aide [who was upset with the author] said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html This contempt for facts is typical of anti-cold fusion people as well. See also Altemyer's web site on Authoritarian thought processes: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Edmund Storms wrote: Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush. Very similar. I have not seen this before. Bush and Palin are both smart in many ways, but they are incurious, unorganized and incapable of expressing coherent thought. Also, you might say they have no respect for facts. Palin was described in the Atlanta Journal the other day: ". . . many Alaska political observers have advised against underestimating her. Several former rivals have pointed to her uncanny ability to make emotional connections with voters, even when she can't answer a question. Andrew Halcro, who lost the governor's race to Palin in 2006, wrote in the Anchorage Daily News last week that she was unintimidated by his mastery of policy details. 'Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers and yet when asked questions you spout off facts, figures and policies and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of that matter?' ' he recalls Palin telling him after a debate. . . ." http://www.ajc.com/search/content/opinion/stories/2008/10/01/tucked.html The Bush administration's contempt for facts was made famous by this quote: "The aide [who was upset with the author] said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html This contempt for facts is typical of anti-cold fusion people as well. See also Altemyer's web site on Authoritarian thought processes: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Has any one noticed that Palin cannot complete a logical thought to its logical end without injecting random ideas? This way of thinking is similar to the unscripted Bush. Do we need another Saturday Night Live character? Ed On Oct 3, 2008, at 12:03 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Palin also states that she represents "Joe Six-Pack", as if the admission should be considered endearing, a badge of authenticity and sincerity. I dunno about others, but it's been my experience that after I consumed a six-pack my views on just about any topic should NOT be represented. Now that you mention it, Palin did sound inebriated: ". . . We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse. And the colleagues in the Senate weren't going to go there with him. So we have John McCain to thank for at least warning people. And we also have John McCain to thank for bringing in a bipartisan effort people to the table so that we can start putting politics aside, even putting a campaign aside, and just do what's right to fix this economic problem that we are in. It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street. And now we have to be ever vigilant and also making sure that credit markets don't seize up. That's where the Main Streeters like me, that's where we would really feel the effects. . . ." Not quite as bad as the Courin interview, that was repeated nearly verbatim on SNL: PALIN: "But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the -- oh, it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. "So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is part of that." Here is the SNL version: FEY AS PALIN: "Like every American I'm speaking with, we're ill about this. We're saying, 'Hey, why bail out Fanny and Freddie and not me?' But ultimately what the bailout does is, help those that are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy to help...uh...it's gotta be all about job creation, too. Also, too, shoring up our economy and putting Fannie and Freddy back on the right track and so healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reigning in spending...'cause Barack Obama, y'know...has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans, also, having a dollar value meal at restaurants. That's gonna help. But one in five jobs being created today under the umbrella of job creation. That, you know...Also..." This is not only the most critical election of our generation, it is also the most hilarious. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
OrionWorks wrote: Palin also states that she represents "Joe Six-Pack", as if the admission should be considered endearing, a badge of authenticity and sincerity. I dunno about others, but it's been my experience that after I consumed a six-pack my views on just about any topic should NOT be represented. Now that you mention it, Palin did sound inebriated: ". . . We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse. And the colleagues in the Senate weren't going to go there with him. So we have John McCain to thank for at least warning people. And we also have John McCain to thank for bringing in a bipartisan effort people to the table so that we can start putting politics aside, even putting a campaign aside, and just do what's right to fix this economic problem that we are in. It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street. And now we have to be ever vigilant and also making sure that credit markets don't seize up. That's where the Main Streeters like me, that's where we would really feel the effects. . . ." Not quite as bad as the Courin interview, that was repeated nearly verbatim on SNL: PALIN: "But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the -- oh, it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. "So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is part of that." Here is the SNL version: FEY AS PALIN: "Like every American I'm speaking with, we're ill about this. We're saying, 'Hey, why bail out Fanny and Freddie and not me?' But ultimately what the bailout does is, help those that are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy to help...uh...it's gotta be all about job creation, too. Also, too, shoring up our economy and putting Fannie and Freddy back on the right track and so healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reigning in spending...'cause Barack Obama, y'know...has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans, also, having a dollar value meal at restaurants. That's gonna help. But one in five jobs being created today under the umbrella of job creation. That, you know...Also..." This is not only the most critical election of our generation, it is also the most hilarious. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Thomas sez: > Jed Rothwell posted > >>This is kind of off-topic but also on topic. > > You got that right, I just deleated the whole Evolution of Good Government > thread, and the secrecy thread too. > > How about someone looking at the video on the website linked in that energy > from air link that I posted, and then lets have a discussion about Respines, > or induced LENR's or, anything but the Bailout Bill, of who won the VP > debate. > > How about that Sarah! I'm going to debate what I want to, and I'm not going > to follow your rules. This is indeed getting off-topic. But then, it IS an election year, so I think the Vortex collective can be allowed a little temporary insanity as we machinate our way through the imperfect process of electing a new leader. A lot's at stake. I also hope someone knowledgeable might care to address the interesting link you brought up at: www.airturbineengine.com And now, trespassing once again back into the treacherous off-topic landscape of presidential & Vice Presidential candidates, I see you admire that spunky lass Palin. Indeed I think she did come off as a tad more impressive during the Thursday night debate as compared to previous interviews. Considering Biden's considerable experience, particularly in foreign affairs, Sarah did better than most expected. I was also heartened to see that after the debate both VP candidates (and extended family) seemed to mingle with each other a lot. I noticed that Biden and Palin seemed to have spent a great deal of time in face-to-face conversation, presumably on off-the-record topics. I gather you especially admired Palin's debating tactic - to debate what she wants to and not someone else's rules. I assume such statements impress some, presumably those who admire the ideals of "Maverickdom". Unfortunately, the proclamation has a tendency to horrify others such as those who wonder if Palin may turn out to be too much of a loose cannon, someone incapable of finding common ground with others. Palin also states that she represents "Joe Six-Pack", as if the admission should be considered endearing, a badge of authenticity and sincerity. I dunno about others, but it's been my experience that after I consumed a six-pack my views on just about any topic should NOT be represented. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
::CHEERS!:: thank you. and, i missed the original energy from air thread. what was the title? On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 9:09 AM, thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jed Rothwell posted > >>This is kind of off-topic but also on topic. > > You got that right, I just deleated the whole Evolution of Good Government > thread, and the secrecy thread too. > > How about someone looking at the video on the website linked in that energy > from air link that I posted, and then lets have a discussion about Respines, > or induced LENR's or, anything but the Bailout Bill, of who won the VP > debate. > > How about that Sarah! I'm going to debate what I want to, and I'm not going > to follow your rules. > > > > --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html --- > >
[Vo]:The Off Topic Threads
Jed Rothwell posted >This is kind of off-topic but also on topic. You got that right, I just deleated the whole Evolution of Good Government thread, and the secrecy thread too. How about someone looking at the video on the website linked in that energy from air link that I posted, and then lets have a discussion about Respines, or induced LENR's or, anything but the Bailout Bill, of who won the VP debate. How about that Sarah! I'm going to debate what I want to, and I'm not going to follow your rules. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
