Question:
Will Roy Moore crack the Bush base?
Ironically, by erecting the ten commandments sculpture Moore had to break one of the ten commandents ala graven imagery. Essentially, his admirers praise a blasphemer! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The "Ten Commandments Judge" is mulling a run for president from the right. Even his conservative admirers say he probably can’t damage Bush — but they hope he doesn’t try. by Fred Clarkson http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/05/04/roy_moore/index.html Alabama’s renegade Chief Justice Roy Moore was already the darling of the far right when he rallied cheering supporters on the steps of the state courthouse last August. Nationally known as the "Ten Commandments Judge," Moore had installed a 5,280-pound granite sculpture of an open book inscribed with the commandments shortly after he was elected in 2001, and then defied a federal court order to remove it. Observers couldn’t help being reminded of Gov. George Wallace’s infamous stand in the schoolhouse door, rallying Alabama segregationists in defiance of a federal court order to integrate the University of Alabama. Now, almost everywhere Moore goes, people ask him to do something else Wallace did: run for president. The possibility that Roy Moore could challenge President Bush in November may not be costing Karl Rove any sleep — yet. But the chance that the popular conservative judge could do to Bush what Ralph Nader did to Al Gore in 2000 — split his ideological base, and cost him the presidency — has analysts crunching numbers and weighing Moore’s chances. Moore and his spokeswoman did not return telephone and e-mail messages from Salon, but Moore’s public statements have been consistent in recent months. He is keeping his options open, he says, and he will decide if he will run when he has exhausted his court appeals in the Ten Commandments case. Meanwhile, the 57-year-old Moore is acting more and more like a candidate as he crisscrosses the country, speaking at gatherings of Christian rightists, home-schoolers and state conventions of the far-right Constitution Party, which was on 41 state ballots in the 2000 election, and is courting Moore to head its ticket. If he ran on the Constitution Party ticket, he would probably be on more state ballots than Nader this year. With 320,000 members it is the third-largest party in the U.S, in terms of registered voters. Will the dynamics of the race change if Moore throws his hat in the ring? Hastings Wyman, a former aide to the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., and editor of the Southern Political Report, thinks so. Wyman told Salon that he thinks Moore has the potential to "do to Bush what Nader did to Gore." Other Republican and Democratic strategists aren’t so sure, but no one thinks Bush can stand much erosion in his base. Certainly some Republican leaders take Moore seriously enough to quietly court him, hoping to keep him in the party and preserve the president’s Christian far-right constituency. The deadline for Moore to declare himself is the June 22-26 Constitution Party national convention, in Valley Forge, Pa. Even a few months can be an eternity in politics. But in recent weeks, Moore has spoken to Constitution Party state conventions in Oregon, Montana, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Ohio. And a Moore for President Web site has popped up. Meanwhile, Moore, like many a pol before him, is keeping his finger to the wind and everyone at the edge of their seats. And the judge doesn’t discourage comparisons with Alabama hero George Wallace, by the way. When a reporter for the Seattle Times observed that the judge’s analysis of the two major parties sounded like Ralph Nader’s, Moore agreed, and added, "As somebody from our state, George Wallace, once said, ‘There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them.’ It’s all about power. I think the people need a choice." Moore’s rise to national prominence began in 1995. The ACLU sued Moore, then a state Circuit Court judge, because he posted a hand-carved plaque of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom and opened court sessions with Christian prayers. His stand became a statewide sensation. "God has chosen, through his son Jesus Christ, this time, this place for all Christians — Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox," declared state Attorney General William Pryor at a pro-Moore rally at the time, "to save our country and save our courts." Then-Gov. Fob James threatened to call up the National Guard to defend Moore and the Ten Commandments against the feds, if necessary. A federal judge eventually ruled that the ACLU’S clients lacked standing in the case — and Moore rode a wave of popularity to the national lecture circuit and election as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Moore says he won’t decide about a presidential run until he exhausts all appeals in his Ten Commandments case. He fought repeated orders to remove the rock, even after federal court appeals failed. Last November, his fellow justices of the Alabama Supreme Court (seven of whom are Republicans) decided they’d had enough, suspending Moore from office, and removing the monument. "People who govern in the name of God," said Justice Douglas Johnstone at the time, "attribute their own personal preferences to God, and therefore recognize no limit in imposing those preferences on other people." The state Court of the Judiciary then made the ouster permanent. Moore’s appeal to a special court of retired judges, sitting in the place of the Alabama Supreme Court, was unanimously denied on April 30. Moore may appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Montgomery Advertiser, the major newspaper in the Alabama state capital, thinks Moore is just "teasing the Constitution Party" and that he would rather not risk playing the spoiler and help elect John Kerry. "But," the paper averred in an editorial, "if Alabamians have learned anything from Moore’s past, it’s that logic doesn’t play much of a role in the decision-making of the Ten Commandments judge." And former Montgomery Advertiser political reporter Todd Kleffman, who covered Moore during the Ten Commandments fracas, predicts Moore will run. "Though he hasn’t said it yet," Kleffman wrote recently in the Danville, Ky., Advocate-Messenger, "my hunch is that Moore will soon announce that he is running for president on the Constitution Party ticket." Whatever his final decision, clearly Moore’s crusade has made him a national figure who is wildly popular on the Christian right. He has become a fixture of both mainstream and conservative Christian media from CNN to Pat Robertson’s 700 Club. Charismatic and a proven vote getter, Moore won his race for an open seat as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court 878,480 to 726,348 in 2000. Now, as he barnstorms the country, he’s galvanizing conservative Christians in a manner not seen since Oliver North was fired from his White House job in the wake of the Iran-Contra scandal. Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund wrote in February that he has seen Moore rouse the crowds at major Christian right conventions from Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum to Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Moore was "treated like a rock star" by the Christian Coalition, "signing autographs and getting thunderous standing ovations." Last month Moore addressed a crowd of about 1,000 Great Falls, Mont. "The crowd was very enthusiastic," says Travis McAdam, a researcher with the Montana Human Rights Network. "People were definitely there to see him [Moore]. And really liked what they heard." It should come as no surprise that Moore has emerged as the dream presidential candidate for leaders of the Constitution Party, which generally views the federal judiciary as unelected tyrants. But the Constitution Party is also an improbable vehicle for any kind of national campaign. It is not only small, but its far-right platform and cast of controversial characters are arguably not ready for mainstream America and the glare of the international press. Still, the party could give Moore a vehicle for doing some damage to Bush, if that were his goal, in at least a handful of key states, most notably Florida, where after ostensibly winning by 537 votes in the bitterly contested 2000 race Bush is currently running behind John Kerry in most polls. Ironically, Florida is the place where even those analysts skeptical about the impact of a Moore run say he could make a difference. Last November, Moore appeared at the Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Fla., and packed the house with more than 1,000 cheering people. "The country has not seen the likes of Moore in many, many years," senior pastor Chuck Baldwin told the crowd, according to the Pensacola News-Journal. "He is a modern-day Patrick Henry and Daniel from the Old Testament." Baldwin is the choice for vice president of the only announced candidate for president, Michael Peroutka, party chairman in Maryland. But Baldwin, who is also a columnist and radio talk show host, has recently told a reporter that he would support Moore if he runs. "After you have divided up the secure Bush states and identified places where 1 or 2 percent of the vote might make a difference," says Tanya Melich, a former Republican activist, and now an independent political consultant, "as I look at the map of states in play, there is really only one — and that’s Florida." She doesn’t think Moore would be much of a factor in his home state. "Alabama is such a solid Bush state," she told Salon. "I just don’t see how it would go to Kerry."
… read more »
Response:
Will Roy Moore crack the Bush base? The "Ten Commandments Judge" is mulling a run for president from the right. Even his conservative admirers say he probably can’t damage Bush — but they hope he doesn’t try. by Fred Clarkson http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/05/04/roy_moore/index.html Alabama’s renegade Chief Justice Roy Moore was already the darling of the far right when he rallied cheering supporters on the steps of the state courthouse last August. Nationally known as the "Ten Commandments Judge," Moore had installed a 5,280-pound granite sculpture of an open book inscribed with the commandments shortly after he was elected in 2001, and then defied a federal court order to remove it. Observers couldn’t help being reminded of Gov. George Wallace’s infamous stand in the schoolhouse door, rallying Alabama segregationists in defiance of a federal court order to integrate the University of Alabama. Now, almost everywhere Moore goes, people ask him to do something else Wallace did: run for president. The possibility that Roy Moore could challenge President Bush in November may not be costing Karl Rove any sleep — yet. But the chance that the popular conservative judge could do to Bush what Ralph Nader did to Al Gore in 2000 — split his ideological base, and cost him the presidency — has analysts crunching numbers and weighing Moore’s chances. Moore and his spokeswoman did not return telephone and e-mail messages from Salon, but Moore’s public statements have been consistent in recent months. He is keeping his options open, he says, and he will decide if he will run when he has exhausted his court appeals in the Ten Commandments case. Meanwhile, the 57-year-old Moore is acting more and more like a candidate as he crisscrosses the country, speaking at gatherings of Christian rightists, home-schoolers and state conventions of the far-right Constitution Party, which was on 41 state ballots in the 2000 election, and is courting Moore to head its ticket. If he ran on the Constitution Party ticket, he would probably be on more state ballots than Nader this year. With 320,000 members it is the third-largest party in the U.S, in terms of registered voters. Will the dynamics of the race change if Moore throws his hat in the ring? Hastings Wyman, a former aide to the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., and editor of the Southern Political Report, thinks so. Wyman told Salon that he thinks Moore has the potential to "do to Bush what Nader did to Gore." Other Republican and Democratic strategists aren’t so sure, but no one thinks Bush can stand much erosion in his base. Certainly some Republican leaders take Moore seriously enough to quietly court him, hoping to keep him in the party and preserve the president’s Christian far-right constituency. The deadline for Moore to declare himself is the June 22-26 Constitution Party national convention, in Valley Forge, Pa. Even a few months can be an eternity in politics. But in recent weeks, Moore has spoken to Constitution Party state conventions in Oregon, Montana, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Ohio. And a Moore for President Web site has popped up. Meanwhile, Moore, like many a pol before him, is keeping his finger to the wind and everyone at the edge of their seats. And the judge doesn’t discourage comparisons with Alabama hero George Wallace, by the way. When a reporter for the Seattle Times observed that the judge’s analysis of the two major parties sounded like Ralph Nader’s, Moore agreed, and added, "As somebody from our state, George Wallace, once said, ‘There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them.’ It’s all about power. I think the people need a choice." Moore’s rise to national prominence began in 1995. The ACLU sued Moore, then a state Circuit Court judge, because he posted a hand-carved plaque of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom and opened court sessions with Christian prayers. His stand became a statewide sensation. "God has chosen, through his son Jesus Christ, this time, this place for all Christians — Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox," declared state Attorney General William Pryor at a pro-Moore rally at the time, "to save our country and save our courts." Then-Gov. Fob James threatened to call up the National Guard to defend Moore and the Ten Commandments against the feds, if necessary. A federal judge eventually ruled that the ACLU’S clients lacked standing in the case — and Moore rode a wave of popularity to the national lecture circuit and election as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Moore says he won’t decide about a presidential run until he exhausts all appeals in his Ten Commandments case. He fought repeated orders to remove the rock, even after federal court appeals failed. Last November, his fellow justices of the Alabama Supreme Court (seven of whom are Republicans) decided they’d had enough, suspending Moore from office, and removing the monument. "People who govern in the name of God," said Justice Douglas Johnstone at the time, "attribute their own personal preferences to God, and therefore recognize no limit in imposing those preferences on other people." The state Court of the Judiciary then made the ouster permanent. Moore’s appeal to a special court of retired judges, sitting in the place of the Alabama Supreme Court, was unanimously denied on April 30. Moore may appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Montgomery Advertiser, the major newspaper in the Alabama state capital, thinks Moore is just "teasing the Constitution Party" and that he would rather not risk playing the spoiler and help elect John Kerry. "But," the paper averred in an editorial, "if Alabamians have learned anything from Moore’s past, it’s that logic doesn’t play much of a role in the decision-making of the Ten Commandments judge." And former Montgomery Advertiser political reporter Todd Kleffman, who covered Moore during the Ten Commandments fracas, predicts Moore will run. "Though he hasn’t said it yet," Kleffman wrote recently in the Danville, Ky., Advocate-Messenger, "my hunch is that Moore will soon announce that he is running for president on the Constitution Party ticket." Whatever his final decision, clearly Moore’s crusade has made him a national figure who is wildly popular on the Christian right. He has become a fixture of both mainstream and conservative Christian media from CNN to Pat Robertson’s 700 Club. Charismatic and a proven vote getter, Moore won his race for an open seat as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court 878,480 to 726,348 in 2000. Now, as he barnstorms the country, he’s galvanizing conservative Christians in a manner not seen since Oliver North was fired from his White House job in the wake of the Iran-Contra scandal. Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund wrote in February that he has seen Moore rouse the crowds at major Christian right conventions from Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum to Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Moore was "treated like a rock star" by the Christian Coalition, "signing autographs and getting thunderous standing ovations." Last month Moore addressed a crowd of about 1,000 Great Falls, Mont. "The crowd was very enthusiastic," says Travis McAdam, a researcher with the Montana Human Rights Network. "People were definitely there to see him [Moore]. And really liked what they heard." It should come as no surprise that Moore has emerged as the dream presidential candidate for leaders of the Constitution Party, which generally views the federal judiciary as unelected tyrants. But the Constitution Party is also an improbable vehicle for any kind of national campaign. It is not only small, but its far-right platform and cast of controversial characters are arguably not ready for mainstream America and the glare of the international press. Still, the party could give Moore a vehicle for doing some damage to Bush, if that were his goal, in at least a handful of key states, most notably Florida, where after ostensibly winning by 537 votes in the bitterly contested 2000 race Bush is currently running behind John Kerry in most polls. Ironically, Florida is the place where even those analysts skeptical about the impact of a Moore run say he could make a difference. Last November, Moore appeared at the Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Fla., and packed the house with more than 1,000 cheering people. "The country has not seen the likes of Moore in many, many years," senior pastor Chuck Baldwin told the crowd, according to the Pensacola News-Journal. "He is a modern-day Patrick Henry and Daniel from the Old Testament." Baldwin is the choice for vice president of the only announced candidate for president, Michael Peroutka, party chairman in Maryland. But Baldwin, who is also a columnist and radio talk show host, has recently told a reporter that he would support Moore if he runs. "After you have divided up the secure Bush states and identified places where 1 or 2 percent of the vote might make a difference," says Tanya Melich, a former Republican activist, and now an independent political consultant, "as I look at the map of states in play, there is really only one — and that’s Florida." She doesn’t think Moore would be much of a factor in his home state. "Alabama is such a solid Bush state," she told Salon. "I just don’t see how it would go to Kerry." She sees a potential Moore factor in Louisiana, which went for Bush last time, but is "in play," since Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s reelection victory last year. Melich sees Minnesota (Gore) and Michigan (Gore) as possibilities as well, noting that George Wallace enjoyed substantial support in Michigan. Micah Sifry, author of "Spoiling for a Fight," a recent book on third parties, thinks that Moore could potentially siphon off enough Christian right votes in Colorado (a Bush state last time) and Oregon (a Gore state) to put both states in play, to Kerry’s advantage. But Sifry … read more »
Response:
Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Only a low-life loathesome despicable fanatical hate-mullah like Qaradawi could work himself into a big snit about women’s veils, while having no problem with vile immoral criminal suicide terrorist attacks! This only shows how Islam has actually deteriorated in recent years: — The consensus of traditional mainstream Islamic legal interpretation had strict rules of war, which forbade almost all forms of terrorism (such as intentionally seeking to harm non-combatants). At that time, the word shahid ("martyr") meant someone dying in a battle for Islam — including someone who engaged in a bold military charge or last stand, in which coming through alive might seem almost hopeless, but not including anyone committing any direct and immediate act of suicide, and most definitely NOT including anyone who targeted civilians as part of his death-struggle! However, nowadays numerous self-appointed Islamic legal "authorities" of modern Jihadi ideology (such as Qaradawi) seem to be eager to discard these prohibitions of traditional Islamic legal doctrine, in their unseemly rush to try to justify and legitimize suicide terrorism attacks. Since they have thus jettisoned what little universalism or religion-neutral "natural law" there ever was in Islam, in pursuit of their transient and ephemeral political passions, it seems that Islam has changed for the worse. So if Islamists perversely glory in and enthusiastically celebrate the blatant raw naked immorality of the suicide terrorism attacks against civilians which their own side commits in violation of all norms of international law and human-rights protection, then they’re flagrant and transparent hypocrites when they noisily demand that their enemies obey the highest and strictest of ethical standards. If the only standard of right and wrong in modern Islam is that whatever is claimed to be done in the service of Islam or Muslims is necessarily and inherently "right" (regardless of the means used or the harm caused), then Islam is becoming a mere supremacist immoralist death-worshiping cult, and not a religion which is truly worthy of anyone’s respect (like any ideology which flaunts its blatant violations of basic universal morality).
Well put indeed. .
Response:
Only a low-life loathesome despicable fanatical hate-mullah like Qaradawi could work himself into a big snit about women’s veils, while having no problem with vile immoral criminal suicide terrorist attacks! This only shows how Islam has actually deteriorated in recent years: — The consensus of traditional mainstream Islamic legal interpretation had strict rules of war, which forbade almost all forms of terrorism (such as intentionally seeking to harm non-combatants). At that time, the word shahid ("martyr") meant someone dying in a battle for Islam — including someone who engaged in a bold military charge or last stand, in which coming through alive might seem almost hopeless, but not including anyone committing any direct and immediate act of suicide, and most definitely NOT including anyone who targeted civilians as part of his death-struggle! However, nowadays numerous self-appointed Islamic legal "authorities" of modern Jihadi ideology (such as Qaradawi) seem to be eager to discard these prohibitions of traditional Islamic legal doctrine, in their unseemly rush to try to justify and legitimize suicide terrorism attacks. Since they have thus jettisoned what little universalism or religion-neutral "natural law" there ever was in Islam, in pursuit of their transient and ephemeral political passions, it seems that Islam has changed for the worse. So if Islamists perversely glory in and enthusiastically celebrate the blatant raw naked immorality of the suicide terrorism attacks against civilians which their own side commits in violation of all norms of international law and human-rights protection, then they’re flagrant and transparent hypocrites when they noisily demand that their enemies obey the highest and strictest of ethical standards. If the only standard of right and wrong in modern Islam is that whatever is claimed to be done in the service of Islam or Muslims is necessarily and inherently "right" (regardless of the means used or the harm caused), then Islam is becoming a mere supremacist immoralist death-worshiping cult, and not a religion which is truly worthy of anyone’s respect (like any ideology which flaunts its blatant violations of basic universal morality). — Hamas motto: لا إله لهم إلا الموت،
Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! Awwww… Aren’t you precious? I just want to give you hugs and kisses. Nope; I shan’t let you waste good chocolate on a mini peeny. It’s the only way she can even get close to orgasm. Not a man, nor woman, nor lesbian frigid wiccan would touch such a thing. She might as well take off the CAST IRON chastity belt because no one is going to be going near her cobwebbed and dusty ice cold cunt. It’s so cold down there that she uses it as a thermos flask to keep her pickled bats wings crispy.
You’re totally stealing my material! Gosh, why can’t you take shit from the playground, like every other self-respecting mini-penii.
Response:
Practice what you screech, shitferbrains. I tagged yers for you, too. Reciprocated, you uneducated frigid wiccan. Cast a hex on me again. IT SO WORKED LAST TIME! No really. It did.
Ok. I cast 8F.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fuck you, you net nazi dripshite. We’llpost WHERE we want, WHEN want, HOWEVER we want, and if a whining pudlicker like you doesn’t like it, tough tabouli. Do you have to make it so obvious that you’re not getting any. *masturbates into a plastic bag and sends it to rhyanon the trailor park frigid witch* Unfortunately you cannot post anywhere if you are doing things which are directly violating your terms of service with your ISP.
Your existence violates the UN charter for human rights. Also, you smell like pee.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fuck you, you net nazi dripshite. We’llpost WHERE we want, WHEN want, HOWEVER we want, and if a whining pudlicker like you doesn’t like it, tough tabouli. Do you have to make it so obvious that you’re not getting any. *masturbates into a plastic bag and sends it to rhyanon the trailor park frigid witch* Unfortunately you cannot post anywhere if you are doing things which are directly violating your terms of service with your ISP. Watch it, Sammy. Last time this happened Suz got so mad her broom handle shot out her ass.
Pfft! That’s a daily event for me.
Response:
Practice what you screech, shitferbrains. I tagged yers for you, too. Reciprocated, you uneducated frigid wiccan. Cast a hex on me again. IT SO WORKED LAST TIME! No really. It did.
Someone send this over to the peeny-midgets please? Um, Sam aka Space Elf aka Grudgebearer aka jackhole with the micro-penii….. CIB is married with kids. How would that make her frigid? Also, most of the people here are not Wiccan, so your mini-pini-insult is falling on deaf ears. I do take interest in the "frigid" comment, however. Is that your excuse for the women who reject "Little Johnson"? Have you made any new mini-penii models lately? Do you guys trade with each other? Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! Awwww… Aren’t you precious? I just want to give you hugs and kisses. Nope; I shan’t let you waste good chocolate on a mini peeny. It’s the only way she can even get close to orgasm. Not a man, nor woman, nor lesbian frigid wiccan would touch such a thing. She might as well take off the CAST IRON chastity belt because no one is going to be going near her cobwebbed and dusty ice cold cunt. It’s so cold down there that she uses it as a thermos flask to keep her pickled bats wings crispy.
Yer little wee wee isn’t working right again, is it? Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! Awwww… Aren’t you precious? I just want to give you hugs and kisses. Nope; I shan’t let you waste good chocolate on a mini peeny.
It’s the only way she can even get close to orgasm. Not a man, nor woman, nor lesbian frigid wiccan would touch such a thing. She might as well take off the CAST IRON chastity belt because no one is going to be going near her cobwebbed and dusty ice cold cunt. It’s so cold down there that she uses it as a thermos flask to keep her pickled bats wings crispy.
Response:
*masturbates into a plastic bag and sends it to rhyanon the trailor park frigid witch*
Oh, look. Little peeny’s sprung a wee leak. Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
Fuck you, you net nazi dripshite. We’llpost WHERE we want, WHEN want, HOWEVER we want, and if a whining pudlicker like you doesn’t like it, tough tabouli. Do you have to make it so obvious that you’re not getting any. *masturbates into a plastic bag and sends it to rhyanon the trailor park frigid witch* Unfortunately you cannot post anywhere if you are doing things which are directly violating your terms of service with your ISP.
Watch it, Sammy. Last time this happened Suz got so mad her broom handle shot out her ass. — b r.g.m.w. FAQ at www.rgmw.org – Just read the damn thing. "Flee, the Stoic Riders of Saim-Hann are upon us! Our bolters are no match for their good posture!" — Blue Raja "I know you miss the Wainwrights, Bobby, but they were weak and stupid people–and that’s why we have wolves and other large predators." — Gary Larson, The Far Side
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! Awwww… Aren’t you precious? I just want to give you hugs and kisses.
Nope; I shan’t let you waste good chocolate on a mini peeny. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
Practice what you screech, shitferbrains. I tagged yers for you, too.
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! — The tiger who lost Calvin Hobbes
Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
Fuck you, you net nazi dripshite. We’llpost WHERE we want, WHEN want, HOWEVER we want, and if a whining pudlicker like you doesn’t like it, tough tabouli.
Do you have to make it so obvious that you’re not getting any. *masturbates into a plastic bag and sends it to rhyanon the trailor park frigid witch* Unfortunately you cannot post anywhere if you are doing things which are directly violating your terms of service with your ISP.
Response:
Practice what you screech, shitferbrains. I tagged yers for you, too.
Reciprocated, you uneducated frigid wiccan. Cast a hex on me again. IT SO WORKED LAST TIME! No really. It did.
Response:
I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
Response:
I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
They must be related to the Yroningboreds. Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
Fuckwits. That drivel is really bad. Not only are they christian, they’re spouting right wing crap. Lush
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
Response:
Why? Lush
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! They must be related to the Yroningboreds. Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
What else would you expect xstains to spew, luv?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fuckwits. That drivel is really bad. Not only are they christian, they’re spouting right wing crap. Lush I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
Response:
So sad. Zsarnok – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
Response:
Why? Lush
For putting people’s posts on their site without permission. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! They must be related to the Yroningboreds.
Love, Aunty xxx cry "Open Sesame!" the curtains draw apart: beyond them fair and free the realms of magick art.
Response:
I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
— The tiger who lost Calvin Hobbes
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fuckwits. That drivel is really bad. Not only are they christian, they’re spouting right wing crap. Lush I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
You fucking loser, don’t top post, no one likes it here — The tiger who lost Calvin Hobbes
Response:
I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP!
Awwww… Aren’t you precious? I just want to give you hugs and kisses.
Response:
Fuck you, you net nazi dripshite. We’llpost WHERE we want, WHEN want, HOWEVER we want, and if a whining pudlicker like you doesn’t like it, tough tabouli. — "Being a good fiend is like being a photographer. You have to look for just the right moment." ~Vejita~
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Fuckwits. That drivel is really bad. Not only are they christian, they’re spouting right wing crap. Lush I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! You fucking loser, don’t top post, no one likes it here — The tiger who lost Calvin Hobbes
Response:
Practice what you screech, shitferbrains. I tagged yers for you, too.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just did a search for my email on Google, and look what came up! http://christianparty.net/familyincomes.htm GASP! — The tiger who lost Calvin Hobbes
Response:
Question:
> Despite your warped view, not all women hate you or all men. Have some > small percentage of women mistreated you? Sure. A small percentage of
A small percentage of the general population, yes. But an overwhelming percentage of women I’ve actually met. And virtually 100% percent of women I’ve been interested in. I consider those fairly reliable population samples.
Response:
> thing about your posts. If guys are so great and women are so evil, you > should probably get yourself a boyfriend. Good riddance from the
If only it were that simple. I’m not nearly as physically attracted to men as I am to women. And the reverse can be said for emotional attraction and respect. But without both it’s very difficult. And then after that, they have to like me back… an obvious stumbling block when you look like me (or more accurately, don’t look like what women want). > heterosexual hierarchy, it will result in at least one more potential > mate for guys like me. 
Of course you will likely give homosexuals a
Not really. If you consider that there are virtually millions of people who are single, one more or one less of your own gender doesn’t actually affect your chances to any measurable degree. If there were 10 men in the world and 10 women, and one guy died… sure, that would help. But when you’re talking about an infinitesimal fraction as one person in a billion or even a million it’s completely irrelevant.
Response:
In alt.support.loneliness Darkfalz <darkf…@algo.net> wrote: >> Despite your warped view, not all women hate you or all men. Have some >> small percentage of women mistreated you? Sure. A small percentage of > A small percentage of the general population, yes. > But an overwhelming percentage of women I’ve actually met. > And virtually 100% percent of women I’ve been interested in.
What kind of women have you been interested in? Has it ever occurred to you that you’re attracted to women who will reject you? Have you ever heard of a self-defeating behavior? How have you approached these women you’ve interested in? Have you also considered that perhaps there’s something in your style that puts them off? Of course, if you approach them with anything in your mind like the hatred toward women you’ve expressed here, no doubt just about any sane woman would reject you. I saw all this having been through a lot of it. I’ve come to realize that some women are just bitches (and some men are just jerks) and should be avoided. Why waste my time on them? I want to move on to the genuine women worth knowing, those who can appreciate what kind of a person I am. They are hard to find, because they are often snatched up quickly. I’ve also realized that one can develop a skewed view of women by consistently meeting the same type. If the only women you meet are in clubs, for example, you are getting a biased sample. The women I want to meet probably don’t go to clubs. — Ralph
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -ralphisgr…@hotmail.com (Ralph) wrote in message <news:cuhjcrkr78384458803@hotmail.com>… > In alt.support.loneliness Darkfalz <darkf…@algo.net> wrote: > >> Despite your warped view, not all women hate you or all men. Have some > >> small percentage of women mistreated you? Sure. A small percentage of > > A small percentage of the general population, yes. > > But an overwhelming percentage of women I’ve actually met. > > And virtually 100% percent of women I’ve been interested in. > What kind of women have you been interested in? Has it ever occurred to > you that you’re attracted to women who will reject you? Have you ever > heard of a self-defeating behavior? > How have you approached these women you’ve interested in? Have you > also considered that perhaps there’s something in your style that puts > them off? Of course, if you approach them with anything in your mind > like the hatred toward women you’ve expressed here, no doubt just > about any sane woman would reject you.
Darfalz probably has had especially bad luck, when it comes to quality of women he has met (idiots in school and stores, it seems). Then again, who the hell knows where to meet good women these days, for they’re very rare.
Response:
On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 01:56:17 GMT, "Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote: >Why is it such a bad label?
Because the blind hatred of a group of people based on the actions of a select few is a logical fallacy. Additionally, it’s just plain wrong to hate people because of the actions of others. A lesson I’ve learned over the course of this year. Unfortunately, it’s also a very natural reaction to have when quite a few people of the same group has hurt you. >Why do women think calling you a misogynist is >going to be so damaging to your character? I don’t think like that at all. I >don’t think any misogynists should be criticised for hating women, there’s a >lot to hate about them these days. Would you criticise a Jew for hating >Nazis? How about an American for hating Osama Bin Laden and his Alcaida >buddies? No, I don’t think you would. Sure, hate isn’t the lovliest of >emotions… but it’s justified some times, and there are worse things. >Consider this. There’s not even a word for it (ball breaker, feminazi etc… >are terms which describe such women, but at the same time also serve to >discredit their own effectiveness since they’re so colloquial) but there are >an extremely large number of women who enjoy hurting men. Who think it’s >great to humiliate them, reject them, belittle them and generally make them >feel like they’re worthless. And this behaviour is not denouced, but >GLORIFIED and encouraged by the media, in music, TV and movies.
That is, unfortunately, true. There has been a "You go girl" mentatlity of late, especially in the popular media … but are you going to let the idiots of Hollywood paint your perception of the world? >Now, how is misogyny any worse than this? Misogyny is actually the response >and part of the solution to these acts. If you hate women, you ignore them. >You don’t care when they try to put you down. You don’t put yourself in a >position where >they can fuck you over.
I would like to be fucked, actually. >Women are evil. True, hate is hate, but is it so wrong to hate evil? Is it >so wrong to harbour a grudge against those who have hurt you repeatedly and >without remorse? Does anyone deserve the benefit of the doubt when their >track record is so inexcusably bad?
Heh. When I first came here, I stated that: "Women are either evil or stupid." To a degree I still believe that, and yet … not. >True, misogyny may be unfair to the 1 or 2 percent (ok, I’ll humour you and >say 10 percent) of "nice" women out there. But so what if it is? Womens’ >disgustingly shallow and cruel attitudes are unfair to well over 50 percent >of men, probably closer to 70 or 80 percent. So what possible case can >anyone have for saying that it’s unjustifiable?
People who are incapable of learning, or detecting a pattern, but that’s their problem. Even then, I sincerely doubt that the number "good" women is as low as 10%. >I don’t see "misogynist" as a bad label, not in these times. If I am called >one, I will wear it with pride – because it means I am standing up to women >and not making excuses for their wrongs and enabling them to go on being >cruel and mean and nasty and so villanously self-centred and still getting >their ASSES KISSED by grovelling men everywhere for it.
Who are you trying to convince? For someone so assured of his righteousness, you seem realy determined to convince us. >They are getting >away with blue murder all because most men don’t have the guts or the balls >to stand up to them and treat them like the bitches and sluts that they are. >Fuck "political correctness" which only serves to protect women and impede >men. Fuck those social niceties that women only adhere to when it suits >them. They’re all so heavily biased towards women that it’s hard to be a guy >and have an opinion without being struck down anymore. >I say ignore them and say how you really feel. You’re entitled.
ALM #129dx———————– E-mail: moc.rr.xoc@mla (typed backwards to prevent SPAM) Website: home.cox.rr.com/alm
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in news:7aKA7.3301$TK2.191510@news.easynews.com: > This way they can go out and fuck like sluts and whores and call it > "sexual independance".
More power to them, if everything’s consensual. Plenty of men do this too… In fact there’s even a kind of conservation law involved:) (For every woman that heterosexually fucks, there’s a man.) > They can make demand upon demand and denigrate men all they like, and > the system protects them from being called shallow or cruel.
Some women are shallow and cruel… so are some men. Not all of either. > If they don’t get what they want, they can blame the sexist male pigs > and the glass ceiling, thus avoiding responsibility.
Some women do this, and some seem to have some sort of complex about it, yes. I’ve never seen a woman indulge in the type of blame and whining I see from you, though. > Sure, it’s a sham… but women have it pretty good these days.
Poor Darkfalz. (pats on the head) Life is supposed to be *so* easy!
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in message <news:5XpA7.3704$px3.185172@news.easynews.com>… > Why is it such a bad label? Why do women think calling you a misogynist is > going to be so damaging to your character? I don’t think like that at all. I > don’t think any misogynists should be criticised for hating women, there’s a > lot to hate about them these days. Would you criticise a Jew for hating > Nazis?
<snip bile-ridden diatribe> I invoke Godwin. You lose, troll.
Response:
> Darfalz probably has had especially bad luck, when it comes to quality > of women he has met (idiots in school and stores, it seems). Then > again, who the hell knows where to meet good women these days, for > they’re very rare.
Exactly. Being told you are "looking in the wrong places" or "meeting the wrong kind of girls" is self evident, and it doesn’t help at all. You could be looking in church or in a nightclub, and you’ll get the same "advice". It’s just an evasion of the real issue, that being the fact that decent hearted girls who would date a man who wasn’t great looking or wealthy are virtually one in a million and thus near impossible to find.
Response:
> Why do you keep falling for women that treat you badly? Low self worth,
maybe? They don’t treat me badly until after I let them know how I feel, at which point I DO lose interest. That’s such a stupid thing to say, being "attracted" to girls who are going to reject you. That’s like someone entering lotto who keeps losing being told "why do you keep picking numbers which you KNOW aren’t going to come up?" I consider myself to have good judgement on this issue, but it basically breaks down into girls I KNOW will reject me, and girls I think will probably reject me. Obviously I have to choose the latter as they are the only two options and it’s the most favourable. > If you admit that only a small percentage of the general female population > treats you badly, then try going after the majority that don’t. Do you
think The majority do. If I give them the chance to, they hurt me or belittle me or use me and then drop me at the side of the road like garbage. There have so far been virtually no exceptions. And there’s been a lot of it drawn totally unprovoked from strangers. It’s just a general lack of consideration for my feelings, I wouldn’t be surprised if most women didn’t know or care unattractive men HAD feelings. > misogyny is an attribute that women look for? If I was interested in a woman > and heard her talking about how men are evil pigs, etc., I would never consider > being with her.
I would. Then I could confront her with "give me the chance to show you that we AREN’T all pigs or shut the hell up about it around me". Women are always quick to mouth off about what jerks men are in front of you, but they shut up quick when you propose they give you a chance to show them otherwise. Remember that next time some silly bitch starts a "all men are bastards" tirade.
Response:
> What kind of women have you been interested in? Has it ever occurred to > you that you’re attracted to women who will reject you? Have you ever > heard of a self-defeating behavior?
Sure I have. It’s pure sophistry. It’s just a theory designed to relegate blame to the rejectee, which is rediculous. Unless you ask someone out who completely hates you or you do it in a totally inappropriate manner, nobody can make them reject you – it’s 100% their decision. > How have you approached these women you’ve interested in? Have you > also considered that perhaps there’s something in your style that puts > them off? Of course, if you approach them with anything in your mind > like the hatred toward women you’ve expressed here, no doubt just > about any sane woman would reject you.
Friend, they were all different, but most of them were shy, didn’t have much interest from guys, some went to church or worked in charities, they seemed like very nice girls and up until I broached the subject of dating, we got along pretty well. Normally women do not even speak to me (well, any longer than it takes for them to think of an excuse to leave). > I saw all this having been through a lot of it. I’ve come to realize > that some women are just bitches (and some men are just jerks) and > should be avoided. Why waste my time on them? I want to move on to the > genuine women worth knowing, those who can appreciate what kind of a > person I am. They are hard to find, because they are often snatched up > quickly.
You always think they are genuine women worth knowing until they reject you. So it’s a catch 22. > I’ve also realized that one can develop a skewed view of women by > consistently meeting the same type. If the only women you meet are in > clubs, for example, you are getting a biased sample. The women I want > to meet probably don’t go to clubs.
I constantly meet the same type… because they are ALL THE SAME. Some just choose to display it more openly. And I steer clear of nightclub skanks in the first place.
Response:
>Well, to put it in perspective, nobody here wishes things on you as bad as >what you are describing. (Rape, murder, etc.) Mostly we just wish you’d >quit crying, grow up, and get some therapy.
Well…SOMETIMES…when he says something that REALLY ticks me off…which is actually most of the time… Eric
Response:
> Is that in quotes because ‘most *independent* [women] with an opinion’ > are actually people who have been brainwashed into thinking that they > ‘deserve’ far more than they do? Feminism is a culturally-accepted > phenomena nowadays; hence, it has been watered down and corrupted. > IMO, the few truly independent thinkers among women are those who > realize that modern-day feminism is a fraud and that an updated (with > equal rights) version of traditional women would serve society much > better than today’s class of female snobs and sluts does.
But who among them would want it? This way they can go out and fuck like sluts and whores and call it "sexual independance". They can make demand upon demand and denigrate men all they like, and the system protects them from being called shallow or cruel. If they don’t get what they want, they can blame the sexist male pigs and the glass ceiling, thus avoiding responsibility. Sure, it’s a sham… but women have it pretty good these days. They live the most abominable but guilt-free life styles, so it’s little wonder few of them have any conscience left.
Response:
In alt.support.loneliness Alan <ogw…@aol.comremove> wrote: > I personally would hate to see Darkfalz move on to another group. > Some of what he has had to say has given voice to the anger that I > feel toward women.
Alan, can you see the difference between anger toward women and _hatred_ of women? Darkfalz is not expressing merely anger – he is expressing hatred. There is nothing healthy in his expressions of hatred and bigotry, except perhaps to help some of us understand how a misogynist’s mind works – and to caution ourselves to see how our own unchecked anger could lead to such blind hatred. Sure, we’re all lonely here, but that’s no excuse to express hatred of other people – a _group_ of people, not individuals. To be honest, I can see some justification to hate individuals if they have done something to warrant it (even if hatred does nothing to help your life), but hatred of groups of people (women, blacks, whites, jews, christians, whomever) is nothing but bigotry and pure ignorance, the kind of thing that has lead to immense suffering over history. Have some women in my life burned me badly? Of course. I’m sure at least one burned you badly, Alan. That doesn’t mean all women are bad. Women get burned by guys too. Don’t fall into the trap of hating all women. Learn to express your anger in a healthy way toward the women who have burned you, but get over it and move on, so you can enjoy some happiness again somewhere down the road. If you choose the path of hatred, you’re choosing a life of misery. It is largely your choice. — Ralph
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in message <news:QMyA7.10207$7B6.443372@news.easynews.com>… > Here’s something I forgot to mention. > Women create misogynists. They treat guys cruelly and patronise them and > they don’t think they are doing anything wrong, they are just having "fun" > and empowering themselves. Then they get all indignant and call him a > bitter, twisted loser when he stops kissing her arse. You see, women don’t > believe they should be held accountable for their evil and unfair treatment > of men, because they think being female gives them the right to do and say > as they please. So they don’t interpret the inevitable backlash as being > their fault or their doing, but that of the guy being a bitter and > misogynistic loser who couldn’t handle an "independant woman with an > opinion".
Is that in quotes because ‘most *independent* [women] with an opinion’ are actually people who have been brainwashed into thinking that they ‘deserve’ far more than they do? Feminism is a culturally-accepted phenomena nowadays; hence, it has been watered down and corrupted. IMO, the few truly independent thinkers among women are those who realize that modern-day feminism is a fraud and that an updated (with equal rights) version of traditional women would serve society much better than today’s class of female snobs and sluts does.
Response:
"headbeat" <j…@psnw.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.163bee4c321ed8709896de@news.psnw.com… > On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 01:56:17 GMT, Darkfalz wrote: > You apparently don’t hate women then, if you go for months on end bashing > them on usenet, you clearly aren’t ignoring them.
I have a theory- In a strange, twisted type of manner, hatred is a sort of love. If you care enough about someone or something to HATE them, you have some form of attraction to them in some sense. If you really disliked them, you would probably just delete them from your consideration and world altogether. Now, don’t read more into this than I am saying here, I’m not saying that hate groups love who they portend to hate, but they identify something in that group that they see in themselves that they can’t stand. I’m also not saying that hate is a good thing, but in my expirence, people who constantly single out someone else generally do so in hopes of being noticed themselves. Dark, if you hate women so much as you say, why not simply ignore them and remove them from consideration? Its a hell of alot easier than trying to get them to see your point of view, which they will be garonteed (so I can’t spell… sue me) not to do, I would think. When you try and write to this, or any other similar group, you will, generally, have 2 types of responces. One is the set of people who say ‘Hell yeah, Darkfalz is preachin’ truth! Women suck! More power to ya!" the other is that which is the predominant majority in this or any other group you will probably find in the internet community, that being those who don’t see things your way and will not respond except to tell you that they either a) are disgusted by your point of view, so shut up, or B) don’t want to hear it, so shut up. Either way, you have gained nothing and have wasted your time. Since you don’t WANT a relationship with women, why not put your time into something you DO care about or want? You won’t change the opinion of men or women by hammering them with YOUR opinion.It is unfortunate, but people will only change if they want to, not if someone else tries to force them to. There are a ton of other things worth doing in place of the tired, tried and not so true girlfriend/boyfriend act. Instead of wasting your time here, do something else. Its not worth bitching if people don’t listen, (and change?)and most people, at least in my expirence, won’t. Just my 2C -E
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in news:QMyA7.10207$7B6.443372@news.easynews.com: > Here’s something I forgot to mention. > Women create misogynists. They treat guys cruelly and patronise them > and they don’t think they are doing anything wrong, they are just > having "fun" and empowering themselves.
A few women do this… A few women misjudge some situations and hurt some guys without realizing it… A few are nice. A few don’t have the courage to handle all situations in the way that they know is best… Nobody’s perfect, men or women. You sure as hell aren’t. > Then they get all indignant and > call him a bitter, twisted loser when he stops kissing her arse.
Maybe a few… And then there are those that call you a bitter, twisted loser because you are bitter, warped, and a loser. > You > see, women don’t believe they should be held accountable for their evil > and unfair treatment of men, because they think being female gives them > the right to do and say as they please.
Very few people actually think like that (the they have the right to do whatever they please, regardless of the effect on other people). There are a few that do, unfortunately. A very few women, maybe… A few ASF’ers and other men, maybe as well. Of course people should be accountable for their actions (which is pretty much my definition of an adult.) But you lose me (and I imagine any other sensible person) when you say that an entire group of people should be "accountable" for the actions of a few (or even most). > So they don’t interpret the > inevitable backlash as being their fault or their doing, but that of > the guy being a bitter and misogynistic loser who couldn’t handle an > "independant woman with an opinion".
Well, what the heck is one of "the nice ones" (even you admit they exist) supposed to do… Say "yes, most women are so evil… I’m accountable for them even though I’m not one of them."? And yes, in my judgement, there are a few "misogynistic losers who can’t handle an independant woman with an opinion", and you seem to be a grade A prime example. > Disgusting. Just disgusting. Knowing what women go through "that time > of the month" is the only thing that puts a smile on my face. Hee, you > deserve it.
Well, to put it in perspective, nobody here wishes things on you as bad as what you are describing. (Rape, murder, etc.) Mostly we just wish you’d quit crying, grow up, and get some therapy.
Response:
In alt.support.shyness Ralph <ralphisgr…@hotmail.com> wrote: : In alt.support.loneliness Alan <ogw…@aol.comremove> wrote: :> I personally would hate to see Darkfalz move on to another group. :> Some of what he has had to say has given voice to the anger that I :> feel toward women. : Alan, can you see the difference between anger toward women and : _hatred_ of women? Darkfalz is not expressing merely anger – he is : expressing hatred. There is nothing healthy in his expressions of : hatred and bigotry, except perhaps to help some of us understand how a : misogynist’s mind works – and to caution ourselves to see how our own : unchecked anger could lead to such blind hatred. <good stuff snip> Nice post. Beware of bitterness. It just makes life harder. Stephen
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in news:5XpA7.3704$px3.185172@news.easynews.com: > Why is it such a bad label? Why do women think calling you a misogynist > is going to be so damaging to your character?
Well, it’s one thing to say that you hate all women… It’s another to whine about how none of them love you in the same breath. > I don’t think like that > at all. I don’t think any misogynists should be criticised for hating > women, there’s a lot to hate about them these days.
There’s a lot to dislike about certain individuals. There’s a lot of aspects of society that you may not like (I certainly don’t like a lot of them.) But deciding to "hate" a whole group of people and want to see them tortured, just because you don’t like how a few of them have acted, is just insane, literally. > Would you criticise > a Jew for hating Nazis?
Well, hating people that have tortured you or murdered your friends and family. Wanting to rape and murder people who decide that going out with you wouldn’t make them very happy is something a pretty different, no? > Consider this. There’s not even a word for it (ball breaker, feminazi > etc… are terms which describe such women, but at the same time also > serve to discredit their own effectiveness since they’re so colloquial) > but there are an extremely large number of women who enjoy hurting men.
Yup, they’re out there. Many of them don’t realize that that’s what they’re doing either… Sometimes the people that hurt other people the most are ones with good intentions. But at any rate, saying that it is "justified" to hate a group of people because of the way a few of them act doesn’t make sense. > Who think it’s great to humiliate them, reject them, belittle them and > generally make them feel like they’re worthless. And this behaviour is > not denouced, but GLORIFIED and encouraged by the media, in music, TV > and movies.
Well, the exact opposite side is true too. Have you listened to much hardcore rap music? You think all those attitudes are favourable to treating women well? I don’t understand an argument that says "some women want to treat me like shit, and that’s terrible, so I should turn around and do the same thing." > Now, how is misogyny any worse than this? Misogyny is actually the > response and part of the solution to these acts.
The point isn’t that it’s worse. The point is that it’s becomming exactly what you hate, which doubles the problem (literally). > If you hate women, you > ignore them. You don’t care when they try to put you down. You don’t > put yourself in a position where > they can fuck you over.
Not letting yourself get fucked over is something that every sane human being owes it to themselves to work on… And when it happens, you learn from it so it doesn’t happen again. You don’t need hate for that. > Women are evil.
What does the word "evil" even mean? > True, hate is hate, but is it so wrong to hate evil? Is > it so wrong to harbour a grudge against those who have hurt you > repeatedly and without remorse?
It’s probably not useful to harbour a grudge for long at any case, but oh well we’re human… But hating a group of people because of the way you’ve been treated by a couple of them is unfounded, yes, and quite silly even. > Does anyone deserve the benefit of the > doubt when their track record is so inexcusably bad?
What’s so bad? Deciding not to put up with your insane and arrogant bullshit? > True, misogyny may be unfair to the 1 or 2 percent (ok, I’ll humour you > and say 10 percent) of "nice" women out there. But so what if it is? > Womens’ disgustingly shallow and cruel attitudes are unfair to well > over 50 percent of men, probably closer to 70 or 80 percent.
Where are you pulling these percentages out of? Your ass? I’ve seen more disgusting and shallow attitudes out of you then out of all the women combined in the last few months. > So what > possible case can anyone have for saying that it’s unjustifiable?
You already said it… You can’t judge every individual in a group by the way a few have treated you. It is unfortunate, but a lot of human nature sucks on both sides of the coin. So what are you going to do? Make the best of what you have, or cry like a baby? Oh wait, I already know your answer. > I don’t see "misogynist" as a bad label, not in these times. If I am > called one, I will wear it with pride – because it means I am standing > up to women and not making excuses for their wrongs and enabling them > to go on being cruel and mean and nasty and so villanously self-centred > and still getting their ASSES KISSED by grovelling men everywhere for > it.
Well, nobody is saying that you have to put up with abusive crap, are they? If you are in an abusive situation and you are able but aren’t willing to do anything about it, then it is your choice to be abused… And I’m sorry, it sucks to be you, but you don’t get any sympathy from me then. You’re going way beyond "standing up" though, of course. > They are getting away with blue murder all because most men don’t > have the guts or the balls to stand up to them and treat them like the > bitches and sluts that they are. Fuck "political correctness" which > only serves to protect women and impede men. Fuck those social niceties > that women only adhere to when it suits them.
Ok, play the game, or else don’t play the game. But don’t expect that whining like a bawling toddler about how you aren’t winning and the game sucks because of it will help you improve anything. > They’re all so heavily > biased towards women that it’s hard to be a guy and have an opinion > without being struck down anymore.
So what, you think that you should disagree with opinions that you don’t like, but that if you have an opinion than nobody should disagree? > I say ignore them and say how you really feel. You’re entitled.
Ok, but if you expect that you’re immune from getting the kind of hatred that you continually dish out to others… then that’s a fair definition of insanity.
Response:
Why is it such a bad label? Why do women think calling you a misogynist is going to be so damaging to your character? I don’t think like that at all. I don’t think any misogynists should be criticised for hating women, there’s a lot to hate about them these days. Would you criticise a Jew for hating Nazis? How about an American for hating Osama Bin Laden and his Alcaida buddies? No, I don’t think you would. Sure, hate isn’t the lovliest of emotions… but it’s justified some times, and there are worse things. Consider this. There’s not even a word for it (ball breaker, feminazi etc… are terms which describe such women, but at the same time also serve to discredit their own effectiveness since they’re so colloquial) but there are an extremely large number of women who enjoy hurting men. Who think it’s great to humiliate them, reject them, belittle them and generally make them feel like they’re worthless. And this behaviour is not denouced, but GLORIFIED and encouraged by the media, in music, TV and movies. Now, how is misogyny any worse than this? Misogyny is actually the response and part of the solution to these acts. If you hate women, you ignore them. You don’t care when they try to put you down. You don’t put yourself in a position where they can fuck you over. Women are evil. True, hate is hate, but is it so wrong to hate evil? Is it so wrong to harbour a grudge against those who have hurt you repeatedly and without remorse? Does anyone deserve the benefit of the doubt when their track record is so inexcusably bad? True, misogyny may be unfair to the 1 or 2 percent (ok, I’ll humour you and say 10 percent) of "nice" women out there. But so what if it is? Womens’ disgustingly shallow and cruel attitudes are unfair to well over 50 percent of men, probably closer to 70 or 80 percent. So what possible case can anyone have for saying that it’s unjustifiable? I don’t see "misogynist" as a bad label, not in these times. If I am called one, I will wear it with pride – because it means I am standing up to women and not making excuses for their wrongs and enabling them to go on being cruel and mean and nasty and so villanously self-centred and still getting their ASSES KISSED by grovelling men everywhere for it. They are getting away with blue murder all because most men don’t have the guts or the balls to stand up to them and treat them like the bitches and sluts that they are. Fuck "political correctness" which only serves to protect women and impede men. Fuck those social niceties that women only adhere to when it suits them. They’re all so heavily biased towards women that it’s hard to be a guy and have an opinion without being struck down anymore. I say ignore them and say how you really feel. You’re entitled.
Response:
"Darkfalz" <darkf…@algo.net> wrote in message <news:5XpA7.3704$px3.185172@news.easynews.com>… > I say ignore them and say how you really feel. You’re entitled.
Nobody’s arguing about your right to say how you feel. You advocate violence, though, and that takes things too far. There’s enough violence in this world already; I can’t imagine wanting to add to it. lm (who’s sick of meanness and spite)
Response:
I personally would hate to see Darkfalz move on to another group. Some of what he has had to say has given voice to the anger that I feel toward women. Mine is not the result of never having dated. I was married for twenty-two years. I don’t want to stay in my anger because that would only perpetuate the lonliness that has pursued me relentlessly. But it’s not just a matter of saying, "okay that’s enough, time to move on." Every one in this group has there own conscious reasons for being lonely. Some are situational and most point to an external source or reason. But the truth of the matter is that most of us have internal reasons that hamper us in our relationships. More often than not the source is from what we learned from relationships within our families as children, and the perceptions that we formed about ourselves and other people as a result of those experiences. And those issues take courage and determination and persistence to unravel and change. Darkfalz has helped me to recognize that I am angry with women. Sometimes it feels closer to rage. I’ve got to do something with this anger If I am going to have anything different than the types of relationships I have had most of my life. The curious thing about feelings is that often times the feeling that is most apparent is not the driving force, so to speak. For example under my own anger is unspeakable pain. I’ve learned how to get to it, and express it in the manner in which it should be expressed. I can only endure just so much and then wait for the "next time." This gives me a clue about Darkfalz and the immense pain that lies just below all that anger. There is not a person in this group that does not have a warped perception of some sort. But everyone’s contribution has the power to effect change, to give cause for thought and to motivate each of us in one direction or the other. It was my understanding that this is what this group is all about. After all, its a given, everyone here is lonely. Alan
Response:
Here’s something I forgot to mention. Women create misogynists. They treat guys cruelly and patronise them and they don’t think they are doing anything wrong, they are just having "fun" and empowering themselves. Then they get all indignant and call him a bitter, twisted loser when he stops kissing her arse. You see, women don’t believe they should be held accountable for their evil and unfair treatment of men, because they think being female gives them the right to do and say as they please. So they don’t interpret the inevitable backlash as being their fault or their doing, but that of the guy being a bitter and misogynistic loser who couldn’t handle an "independant woman with an opinion". Disgusting. Just disgusting. Knowing what women go through "that time of the month" is the only thing that puts a smile on my face. Hee, you deserve it.
Response:
"headbeat" <j…@psnw.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.163bee4c321ed8709896de@news.psnw.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 01:56:17 GMT, Darkfalz wrote: > > Now, how is misogyny any worse than this? Misogyny is actually the response > > and part of the solution to these acts. If you hate women, you ignore them. > > You don’t care when they try to put you down. You don’t put yourself in a > > position where > > they can fuck you over. > You apparently don’t hate women then, if you go for months on end bashing > them on usenet, you clearly aren’t ignoring them. That is the curious > thing about your posts. If guys are so great and women are so evil, you > should probably get yourself a boyfriend. Good riddance from the > heterosexual hierarchy, it will result in at least one more potential > mate for guys like me.
Yea true anger and hurt always makes one want to go that way – and seek same sex love – of course it’s not really that simple 
Response:
In alt.support.loneliness Darkfalz <darkf…@algo.net> wrote: > Why is it such a bad label? Why do women think calling you a misogynist is > going to be so damaging to your character? I don’t think like that at all. I > don’t think any misogynists should be criticised for hating women, there’s a > lot to hate about them these days. Would you criticise a Jew for hating > Nazis?
No. Your analogy with Nazis and women/Jews and misogynists is badly flawed. Here’s how: the Nazis were founded with hatred of Jews as a basis. By definition Nazis hated Jews and actively worked to exterminate them. Of course people who have labored to kill you and your race would engender hatred. Despite your warped view, not all women hate you or all men. Have some small percentage of women mistreated you? Sure. A small percentage of women mistreat men also. There are manipulators out there from both sexes. Not all men mistreat women. Not all women mistreat men. You of course cannot see this with your tunnel-vision, that people of both sexes are individuals and susceptible to a range of social behavior. It makes you feel better to put all women in a basket and hate them. It’s simpler and less complicated. This is how blind hatred works. In fact, your hatred of women is probably unexamined self-hatred directed outward. You are unwilling to examine your own life and see what you might change in your behavior to get better results with women. It’s just easier to _hate women_ than to look within (question: _WHY_ do you think you are attracted to women who consistently mistreat you?). This is why people are attracted to hate groups, because they are unwilling to look within. Your analogy should instead be: would Jews be justified in hating _Germans_? Of course not. Not all Germans hated Jews and some tried to help Jews during World War II. Again, not all women hate men – I suspect _most_ of them don’t. Those of us without your warped perception see that clearly. Please, get help. — Ralph
Response:
On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 01:56:17 GMT, Darkfalz wrote: > Now, how is misogyny any worse than this? Misogyny is actually the response > and part of the solution to these acts. If you hate women, you ignore them. > You don’t care when they try to put you down. You don’t put yourself in a > position where > they can fuck you over.
You apparently don’t hate women then, if you go for months on end bashing them on usenet, you clearly aren’t ignoring them. That is the curious thing about your posts. If guys are so great and women are so evil, you should probably get yourself a boyfriend. Good riddance from the heterosexual hierarchy, it will result in at least one more potential mate for guys like me. Of course you will likely give homosexuals a bad name too, but good riddance is the the phrase, slightly less competition for the evil females sounds pretty good to me. I think you should choose a new newsgroup for your ramblings, because you were already a broken record repeating the same things over and over again, ad nauseam, several months ago. It doesn’t work when the message is crap to begin with, you definitely need a new strategy if you want to be an effective troll. — headbeat
Response:
Question:
Not to be contrary, really, but that is "Froehliche" Weinachten. (my husband read these post’s and requested that I post to this. (Germans are so picky) Alles, Alles Gute!
No problem – any help with the language is very much appreciated! :c) Judy
Response:
I am having a wonderful day.. all my work is done and I can settle down.. We are waiting for the daughter to arrive and we can open our presents.. I’m so glad Jackie… that you have recieved peace of mind. Big hugs for you.
You know what Jeannette, a whole new bunch of worries start up.. If you let them.. I do not like the closed system.. I am beginning to like it less and less.. That is not saying I like the way it is now tho.. Jackie
Response:
I do not like the closed system.. I am beginning to like it less and less.. That is not saying I like the way it is now tho..
I know, and I can relate. And I do understand that you are arguing for semi-open over open, not closed over open. Heather open adoption bmom
Response:
[snip] What is your opinion of the *child* being visited by the bparents and the half brothers and sisters?
So what do you want, the bmother to live secrets and lies…..hide her family…wait until her achild and later children are all adults and then have a coming out party? Or are you looking at it from your experience and expect the later children to celebrate that the awful past is now solved because you have begun reuniting with your ason? Hmmm…do you think maybe your children might not just resent your ason and his family since their childhood was impacted from the get go because of his existence? What have you resolved as far as who the father is….you must by now, have some idea if he is of your past lover or the rapist just by seeing his picture. The child is expected to play and have tea with his or her brothers
Come on Jackie, don’t/didn’t your kids play with their cousins, this isn’t much different, give children credit of more resourcefulness than your mind seems to conjure up…. IMOHO you still don’t get it because you still want every adoption in the present to be based on your experience where you still feel the CHOICE was not yours. Wake-Up it is almost year 2000…..society and information is ever changing and adoption is not in the 60’s dark shadows. Yes there is much to be challenged still but you are still trying to fit it into your past. Just what kind of tea party are you planning if you ever get to meet your ason’s children???? Hmmm maybe they won’t be able to process it…. you best just leave it to letters and not meet them. Dolly [snip] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Jackie C
Response:
I’m Canadian and here it’s Merry Christmas but when I talk with my German roots Froelick Wieneachten goes over well. :c)
Not to be contrary, really, but that is "Froehliche" Weinachten. (my husband read these post’s and requested that I post to this. (Germans are so picky) Alles, Alles Gute! JuliaR – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Merry Christmas ! or as we say in my Adoptive Belgium Culture, "Zalig Kertsmis" German, "Froelich Wieneachten" Hawian, "Mele Kalikimaka" In Czech, "Vesele vanoce" Heather open adoption bmom "Kde se pivo pije, tam se dobje zije" (Where the people drink beer, there life is good.)
Response:
C.) writes: I hope you are having a merry xmas..
You bet. I love hanging around with my DHs family (not). Christmas is wonderful- especially the day after. :) I am having a wonderful day.. all my work is done and I can settle down.. We are waiting for the daughter to arrive and we can open our presents..
I’m so glad Jackie… that you have recieved peace of mind. Big hugs for you. Jeannette, Bmom There ain’t no answer. There ain’t going to be any answer. There never has been an answer. That’s the answer. Gertrude Stein (1874-1946)
Response:
live in Canada.. I am 57 years old and I am going to get to move to the country soon.. I am also an uneducated woman.. I am a painter, an artist.. Jackie, you speak from your heart, to me that is educated. An artist? Sensitive and creative, it shows in your postings.
Thanks Linda I am intimidated by politicians or person that can say things in a very learned manner.. I would be of no use to anyone wanting to make changes.. I got all the National Geographic’s on CD.. for xmas..Cant wait to sit and go thru them I hope you are having a nice xmas. Jackie C
Response:
YEAH Ron, and just think YOU supplied the hammer….. thank GOD!
Is Ron an adoptee? That would explain the hammer.. Linda bmom of the 60’s, mom of the 90’s DIPLOMACY…the art of saying *nice doggie*, till you find the rock.
Response:
C.) writes:
I said: Hey, it’s way better than sniveling and whining. Jackie has come a long way here, and she will continue to grow. She’ll get it. I have a lot of faith in her. :) You mean I am not stupid?
Did I say that? :) Jeannette, Bmom There ain’t no answer. There ain’t going to be any answer. There never has been an answer. That’s the answer. Gertrude Stein (1874-1946)
Response:
I’m Canadian and here it’s Merry Christmas but when I talk with my German roots Froelick Wieneachten goes over well. :c)
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Merry Christmas ! or as we say in my Adoptive Belgium Culture, "Zalig Kertsmis" German, "Froelich Wieneachten" Hawian, "Mele Kalikimaka" In Czech, "Vesele vanoce" Heather open adoption bmom "Kde se pivo pije, tam se dobje zije" (Where the people drink beer, there life is good.)
Response:
C.) writes: I said: Hey, it’s way better than sniveling and whining. Jackie has come a long way here, and she will continue to grow. She’ll get it. I have a lot of faith in her. :) You mean I am not stupid? Did I say that? :)
I hope you are having a merry xmas.. I am having a wonderful day.. all my work is done and I can settle down.. We are waiting for the daughter to arrive and we can open our presents.. Jackie The stupid bit is me commenting on how some here think that if a person is smart they will be okay.. Or something like that.. So I am enjoying calling me stupid..
Response:
[snip] What is your opinion of the *child* being visited by the bparents and the half brothers and sisters? So what do you want, the bmother to live secrets and lies…..hide her family…wait until her achild and later children are all adults and then have a coming out party?
No.. I do not think the family should be breached in the first place.. Or are you looking at it from your experience and expect the later children to celebrate that the awful past is now solved because you have begun reuniting with your ason?
I am looking at the real issues a child that is relinquished, goes through.. Hmmm…do you think maybe your children might not just resent your ason and his family since their childhood was impacted from the get go because of his existence?
Wait.. I am a bmom.. not an amom.. And I agree the issues of the children that were kept is something that should be discussed too.. A child thinking well she may give me away too.. What have you resolved as far as who the father is….you must by now, have some idea if he is of your past lover or the rapist just by seeing his picture.
I don’t want to go into that.. The child is expected to play and have tea with his or her brothers Come on Jackie, don’t/didn’t your kids play with their cousins, this isn’t much different, give children credit of more resourcefulness than your mind seems to conjure up….
As I just said the issues are not that simple.. IMOHO you still don’t get it because you still want every adoption in the present to be based on your experience where you still feel the CHOICE was not yours.
No.. I want the secret adoptions stopped.. I want very experienced person overseeing every adoption.. I want everyones issues looked at.. Wake-Up it is almost year 2000…..society and information is ever changing and adoption is not in the 60’s dark shadows. Yes there is much to be challenged still but you are still trying to fit it into your past.
I think it is in dark shadows.. They are buying and selling babies on the internet.. I think.. Just what kind of tea party are you planning if you ever get to meet your ason’s children????
bsons.. not a sons.. I am not planning.. I am living one day at a time.. Hmmm maybe they won’t be able to process it…. you best just leave it to letters and not meet them. Dolly
I don’t know.. I am open for anything my bson wants to do.. it is his ballpark.. Jackie C
Response:
live in Canada.. I am 57 years old and I am going to get to move to the country soon.. I am also an uneducated woman.. I am a painter, an artist..
Jackie, you speak from your heart, to me that is educated. An artist? Sensitive and creative, it shows in your postings. Linda bmom of the 60’s, mom of the 90’s DIPLOMACY…the art of saying *nice doggie*, till you find the rock.
Response:
[snip]
(huge snip) Talk about hitting the nail on the head!!!!!!! IMOHO you still don’t get it because you still want every adoption in the present to be based on your experience where you still feel the CHOICE was not yours. Wake-Up it is almost year 2000…..society and information is ever changing and adoption is not in the 60’s dark shadows. Yes there is much to be challenged still but you are still trying to fit it into your past. Dolly
Didn’t take you long to figure her out! Good work!
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [snip] (huge snip) Talk about hitting the nail on the head!!!!!!! IMOHO you still don’t get it because you still want every adoption in the present to be based on your experience where you still feel the CHOICE was not yours.
YEAH Ron, and just think YOU supplied the hammer….. thank GOD!
Response:
writes: Your own anger although, perhaps, justified, is defeating you. You can rant and rave, scream and cajole, complain and moan on this NG untill hell freezes over. One thing is for certain, You will not bring about any significant change whatsoever.
Hey, it’s way better than sniveling and whining. Jackie has come a long way here, and she will continue to grow. She’ll get it. I have a lot of faith in her. :) Jeannette, Bmom There ain’t no answer. There ain’t going to be any answer. There never has been an answer. That’s the answer. Gertrude Stein (1874-1946)
Response:
writes: Your own anger although, perhaps, justified, is defeating you. You can rant and rave, scream and cajole, complain and moan on this NG untill hell freezes over. One thing is for certain, You will not bring about any significant change whatsoever. Hey, it’s way better than sniveling and whining. Jackie has come a long way here, and she will continue to grow. She’ll get it. I have a lot of faith in her. :)
You mean I am not stupid? Jackie C
Response:
Ohhh goodie.. Dear Jackie , I have read with much interest and concern your posts. They are for the most part interesting, stimulating.
I think I am.. I am told I am.. It’s quite obvious that you are a very passionate, personal advocate for BMothers rights.
Don’t forget children’s rights.. Somehow, I feel your trapped in a sea of overwhelming anger and resentment to the Adoption process as a whole.
I hate that a man or woman has to relinquish his or her child.. Hate it to a degree.. that it could make my nutty… No ! I am not interested nor, do I have the inclination to, engage in trite little flame wars over passionate opinions that have no ability to bring about any significant change.
So I am to go back to my corner and shut the hell up then? I live in Canada.. I am 57 years old and I am going to get to move to the country soon.. I am also an uneducated woman.. I am a painter, an artist.. What change can I make other than posting my opinions and thoughts in a public place? The only ongoing process I see is a very bitter and defensive individual seeking the alliance of other BirthMothers,
I do not want alliances with other bmoms.. to defend her position on Bmothers rights.
I do not think it right that the bmoms or bdads have no rights in the open scenario.. Ya I know in some states.. but I think those rights only extend to visiting, please someone correct me if I am wrong.. I have yet to see anyone challenge or minimize those rights.
What about the issue of the bmom signing the papers hours after the baby is born.. She is still drugged.. Does she have rights? I think not.. A society that condones such a thing is not a very good society in my books.. the only thing that is apparent to me, is that some have a different perspective on the application or institutionalization of those rights.
I think bmoms are led down a garden path in the good old USA, Canada too probably.. from the first contact with an agency.. or a planned parenthood place.. to the open scenario as it stands now.. in some sates.. Furthermore, I agree with you on many, if not most of, your perspectives regarding those Human rights. Your own anger although, perhaps, justified, is defeating you.
I DON’T CARE!!!! You can rant and rave, scream and cajole, complain and moan on this NG untill hell freezes over.
I know, bmoms are still expected to sign the darn papers hours after the baby is born.. And they are expected to choose the aparents.. One thing is for certain, You will not bring about any significant change whatsoever.
I do not have a cross to pull down the street.. sorry.. I dont have a hair shirt either… In short, your strategies to bring about real effective, dynamic change and progress for the Rights of Bmothers is being sabotaged by your own emotional response.
I DON’T CARE!!!! No legislator or Social Worker is going to read your posts and say, "Hey! we gotta make some changes regarding bmothers rights, just check out these posts" Sorry! It don’t happen that way.
You have me confused with someone that thinks she can make a change.. I have no such illusions.. I think that it is way out of control.. heck..now babies are bought and sold on the internet.. I think changes need to occur as well. I am as strong, if not a stronger advocate for Adoptees rights.
What is your opinion of the *child* being visited by the bparents and the half brothers and sisters? The child is expected to play and have tea with his or her brothers and sisters.. Do you think that healthy for the child? Finally, I challenge you openly, on this NG to Identify 3, (only 3) means or methods of helping to bring about significant real change for Bmothers rights.
Sorry.. we are the breeders.. We are too stupid.. Methods that are easily obtainable, executeable, and swift.
It is not going to happen.. The good old USA allow private adoptions. Canada probably does too.. I honestly believe the secrets and lies are worse now.. The old bait and switch, is what I see.. Do that, and I will be at your side and willing to march right into Hell along side you.
Awe.. Can’t we just march into hell anyway? On the other hand, persisting to act like a blameless, hysterical, out of control birthmother, ready to pounce on the least little thing said that you don’t agree with, only serves to alienate Adoptees and Adoptors.
(sigh) I once was one of the CB.. Check out deja news.. I have been hammered on here.. more than once.. Birth Mothers need the Legal, Political and Sociological support of the entire triad to bring about any REAL social change.
This whole damn industry of buying and selling of children, needs to be shut down.. .. And then proper persons put in charge.. But that costs too much money.. and hey.. the tax incentives are on the adoptive parents side, they get deductions in the thousands.. And the lobby for this deduction is headed by …… wait for it.. Adoptive parents.. United we stand, Devided we fall. Are you a devider? or a uniter?
I hate the whole damn system.. Are you someone who really has what it takes to organize a real attack against an obviously unjust system?
No I intend to be a little old lady that does needlepoint.. and watercolors.. or are you really just a whinnig, complaining, hysterical, powerless, little girl who’s gonna go home crying cause, someone broke your jump rope. I’d like to think that your a very persuasive, intelligent, progressive woman that should be taken seriously. Someone, who can get things done!
Sorry I am moving to the country.. I am going to spend my days.. happy.. now.. Jackie C
Response:
How do say that Phonetically! My Brother was adopted by a Czech Family, I’m gonna surprise his Mom.
ves-uh-lay van-ohts-seh And, "dobry den" to you! (dub-ree den= Good day) Heather open adoption bmom
Response:
How do say that Phonetically! My Brother was adopted by a Czech Family, I’m gonna surprise his Mom. ves-uh-lay van-ohts-seh And, "dobry den" to you! (dub-ree den= Good day)
Heyyyyy… you can’t fool ME! I know PIG LATIN when I see it. Ghoulagirl Well, it really don’t matter much where you are ‘Cause home is in your heart It’s a feeling that you wake with one day. - Phil Collins.
Response:
Merry Christmas ! or as we say in my Adoptive Belgium Culture, "Zalig Kertsmis" German, "Froelich Wieneachten" Hawian, "Mele Kalikimaka"
In Czech, "Vesele vanoce" Heather open adoption bmom "Kde se pivo pije, tam se dobje zije" (Where the people drink beer, there life is good.)
Response:
How do say that Phonetically! My Brother was adopted by a Czech Family, I’m gonna surprise his Mom. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Merry Christmas ! or as we say in my Adoptive Belgium Culture, "Zalig Kertsmis" German, "Froelich Wieneachten" Hawian, "Mele Kalikimaka" In Czech, "Vesele vanoce" Heather open adoption bmom "Kde se pivo pije, tam se dobje zije" (Where the people drink beer, there life is good.)
Response:
Dear Jackie , I have read with much interest and concern your posts. They are for the most part interesting, stimulating. It’s quite obvious that you are a very passionate, personal advocate for BMothers rights. Somehow, I feel your trapped in a sea of overwhelming anger and resentment to the Adoption process as a whole. No ! I am not interested nor, do I have the inclination to, engage in trite little flame wars over passionate opinions that have no ability to bring about any significant change. The only ongoing process I see is a very bitter and defensive individual seeking the alliance of other BirthMothers, to defend her position on Bmothers rights. I have yet to see anyone challenge or minimize those rights. the only thing that is apparent to me, is that some have a different perspective on the application or institutionalization of those rights. Furthermore, I agree with you on many, if not most of, your perspectives regarding those Human rights. Your own anger although, perhaps, justified, is defeating you. You can rant and rave, scream and cajole, complain and moan on this NG untill hell freezes over. One thing is for certain, You will not bring about any significant change whatsoever. In short, your strategies to bring about real effective, dynamic change and progress for the Rights of Bmothers is being sabotaged by your own emotional response. No legislator or Social Worker is going to read your posts and say, "Hey! we gotta make some changes regarding bmothers rights, just check out these posts" Sorry! It don’t happen that way. I think changes need to occur as well. I am as strong, if not a stronger advocate for Adoptees rights. Finally, I challenge you openly, on this NG to Identify 3, (only 3) means or methods of helping to bring about significant real change for Bmothers rights. Methods that are easily obtainable, executeable, and swift. Do that, and I will be at your side and willing to march right into Hell along side you. On the other hand, persisting to act like a blameless, hysterical, out of control birthmother, ready to pounce on the least little thing said that you don’t agree with, only serves to alienate Adoptees and Adoptors. Birth Mothers need the Legal, Political and Sociological support of the entire triad to bring about any REAL social change. United we stand, Devided we fall. Are you a devider? or a uniter? Are you someone who really has what it takes to organize a real attack against an obviously unjust system? or are you really just a whinnig, complaining, hysterical, powerless, little girl who’s gonna go home crying cause, someone broke your jump rope. I’d like to think that your a very persuasive, intelligent, progressive woman that should be taken seriously. Someone, who can get things done! Merry Christmas ! or as we say in my Adoptive Belgium Culture, "Zalig Kertsmis" German, "Froelich Wieneachten" Hawian, "Mele Kalikimaka"
Response:
Question:
"I don’t think the NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is found." Hi, Kip. I can agree that there might be some folks who do not want a cure.. (not sure why…but accept it might be) though I’m at a loss to understand why you think a non-profit organization like NMSS, devoted solely to the progress in finding a VIABLE cure for MS would have anything at all to *lose if one were found. They’re not in the profit business. If we’re cured, they lose nothing. They’ll still be in the non-profit business of counselling and providing information to newly Dxed… I just don’t understand your position on this… (No flames here… just an honest discourse! <smile>) Very best, Judith
Response:
Judith, I guess I thought that some employees in the NMSS would fear for their jobs if a cure was found. I think what I really have against the NMSS (at least my local chapter) is personal though. When I was first diagnosed I decided to use the Swank diet as my main treatment not one of the ABC’s.(This was before I had heard of the Mexican clinic or the Illinois clinic.) The local NMSS people knew I chose the Swank diet as treatment although I didn’t put down the ABC’s. I signed up to join a support group. I got no response. I just thought that they had misplaced my name. I asked again. Still no response. I asked a third time. No response. After three times I’ve started to think they didn’t want me because I used only the Swank diet as a treatment. I can’t see any other reason as I’m a nice guy and personable. Best wishes,Kip – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Eagle Way2 wrote: > "I don’t think the NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is > found." > Hi, Kip. > I can agree that there might be some folks who do not want a cure.. (not sure > why…but accept it might be) though I’m at a loss to understand why you think > a non-profit organization like NMSS, devoted solely to the progress in finding > a VIABLE cure for MS would have anything at all to *lose if one were found. > They’re not in the profit business. If we’re cured, they lose nothing. > They’ll still be in the non-profit business of counselling and providing > information to newly Dxed… I just don’t understand your position on this… > (No flames here… just an honest discourse! <smile>) > Very best, > Judith
Response:
Hi Kip! You wrote:
<< I think what I really have against the NMSS (at least my local chapter) is personal though. >> I don’t think your choice of treatment entered into this situation. I had the same problem with the local NMSS, and I am on Betaseron. The problem was probably inefficiency: a lot of people working there are part-timers, and they also have MS. Finally, I found out when and where they were meeting through the hospital, and I just showed up. Take care! Sylvia
Response:
Kip King wrote The local NMSS people knew I chose the Swank diet as treatment although I didn’t put down the ABC’s. I signed up to join a support group. I got no response. I just thought that they had misplaced my name. I asked again. Still no response. I asked a third time. No response. After three times I’ve started to think they didn’t want me because I used only the Swank diet as a treatment. I can’t see any other reason as I’m a nice guy and personable. Hi Kip, That is so sweet what you wrote. <smiling at you> Of course I don’t know YOUR local MS Society. But I don’t believe that has anything to do with it. I believe it might just take a fourth time for them to get back to you. <smiling at you> Try again! You do the treatment of your choice. Take care, Dawn
Response:
"I asked again. Still no response. I asked a third time. No response. After three times I’ve started to think they didn’t want me because I used only the Swank diet as a treatment. I can’t see any other reason as I’m a nice guy and personable." Kip, Okay, now I can see where you’re doubt is coming from. But, I had the same experience with my only local support group…and they knew *nothing about me. I can ASSURE you that NO one at NMSS, (and certainly not your local support group) cares about the treatment you choose to take. They don’t make judgments about those things… They really don’t have time. It’s just possible that you ran into a strange situation. It happens. But The NMSS would have their hands *really even *fuller, if there was a "cure". First, it would take years to educate different people, and redfine assistance and information. I doubt anyone at the NMSS (many of whom HAVE MS) would make such a judgment. IF they even remembered it! And, it certainly does NOT change the fact that they are working with hundreds of medical professionals to help find a cure for US, and keep us informed! Of COURSE they want to find a cure… Just ask LaVonne about how much time and energy is spent lobbying in Washington, etc… I don’t agree with much of what they say, but they’re are some excellent things in the newsletter, too! I, too, have had some less than perfect responses from the NMSS… But mostly because I lived in such rural areas. I *still feel that the NMSS is "fer us, not agin’ us"! <smile> It’s certainly been acknowledged that some of the "Local" chapters need some new personnel, or policy changes, but one can always contact the Main Office with a legitimate complaint. They DO take action. Remember, they’re are hundreds of PWMS working part time or full time for *minimum wage, to help… to feel useful…and to help out their meager SSDI checks. But ignoring you because of the Swank Diet? My guess would be the answer to that is… No Way! <smile> Best, Judith O Memory, Memory! Wherefore art thou, Memory? —just me
Response:
On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 04:31:56 -0500, "Dawn Jenkins" <da…@sprint.ca> wrote: >Hi Kip and others, >Could someone please correct me if I’m wrong ?????? Wasn’t there a time >several years ago when antibiotics was thought to be the cure for MS????
I had a chat with a neuro about three years ago and he told me that when he first studied MS in depth he had helped a team investigating possible bacterial causes. He also said that antibiotics have been used in the past but nothing positive came of the investigations. The investigation was over thirty years ago so it must be due for a repeat! Steve — Stephen Wolstenholme Neural Network Shareware http://www.tropheus.demon.co.uk
Response:
This is all I know so far. When I find out more, I’ll let the group know. Kip King – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -darby7…@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article <36C29DC8.D7685…@home.com>, > Kip King <wodi…@home.com> wrote: > > In spite of what some may think, I don’t advocate Theratec. I and others > > are in touch with three Mexican doctors who are investigating it. I’ll > > let the group know what I find out. Meanwhile, I recently found out > > about another possible cure in Aurora,IL. It’s from a company called > > Life Care Systems. They are more conservative and won’t call it a cure > > until someone is free of MS for 15 years. It uses antibiotics. I’m not > > sure about it too. Joe Farinella who went to Theratec, and who is a part > > of this group, says he’s in touch with a few people who went to Life > > Care and are now planning to go to Theratec. The program at Life Care > > has you go there for an exam and tests which cost about $800. They say > > insurance will probably pay for it. You then go back home with > > instructions for your doctor on what antibiotics to prescribe. You have > > to take the antibiotics for six months to two years. If these possible > > cures don’t pan out, I’ll keep on looking on my own. I don’t think the > > NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is found. This > > message is for information only. I’m not endorsing any treatment. > > Best wishes,Kip King > What What do you mean by a "cure" ? If you are RR does it mean that you no > longer get exacerbations? If you are PPMS does mean that you have the myelin > re-grown, or some substitute, and then you walk again? > gcopl…@inet-systems.net > Be > ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Response:
In article <36C29DC8.D7685…@home.com>, Kip King <wodi…@home.com> wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> In spite of what some may think, I don’t advocate Theratec. I and others > are in touch with three Mexican doctors who are investigating it. I’ll > let the group know what I find out. Meanwhile, I recently found out > about another possible cure in Aurora,IL. It’s from a company called > Life Care Systems. They are more conservative and won’t call it a cure > until someone is free of MS for 15 years. It uses antibiotics. I’m not > sure about it too. Joe Farinella who went to Theratec, and who is a part > of this group, says he’s in touch with a few people who went to Life > Care and are now planning to go to Theratec. The program at Life Care > has you go there for an exam and tests which cost about $800. They say > insurance will probably pay for it. You then go back home with > instructions for your doctor on what antibiotics to prescribe. You have > to take the antibiotics for six months to two years. If these possible > cures don’t pan out, I’ll keep on looking on my own. I don’t think the > NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is found. This > message is for information only. I’m not endorsing any treatment. > Best wishes,Kip King
What What do you mean by a "cure" ? If you are RR does it mean that you no longer get exacerbations? If you are PPMS does mean that you have the myelin re-grown, or some substitute, and then you walk again? gcopl…@inet-systems.net Be ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Response:
In spite of what some may think, I don’t advocate Theratec. I and others are in touch with three Mexican doctors who are investigating it. I’ll let the group know what I find out. Meanwhile, I recently found out about another possible cure in Aurora,IL. It’s from a company called Life Care Systems. They are more conservative and won’t call it a cure until someone is free of MS for 15 years. It uses antibiotics. I’m not sure about it too. Joe Farinella who went to Theratec, and who is a part of this group, says he’s in touch with a few people who went to Life Care and are now planning to go to Theratec. The program at Life Care has you go there for an exam and tests which cost about $800. They say insurance will probably pay for it. You then go back home with instructions for your doctor on what antibiotics to prescribe. You have to take the antibiotics for six months to two years. If these possible cures don’t pan out, I’ll keep on looking on my own. I don’t think the NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is found. This message is for information only. I’m not endorsing any treatment. Best wishes,Kip King
Response:
Hi Kip and others, Could someone please correct me if I’m wrong ?????? Wasn’t there a time several years ago when antibiotics was thought to be the cure for MS???? You take a certain kind for a specific time and then WHAMMO you’re cured. Or was I dreaming? This isn’t going to work either. It didn’t work before. So it’s certainly not going to work now. <smiling> Take care, Dawn
Response:
Hi Kip! You wrote:
<< I don’t think the NMSS wants a cure. They have too much to lose if one is found. >> I don’t know where you got this idea! Everyone I have met in the NMSS either has the damn disease or is close to someone who does. Why on earth they wouldn’t want a cure is beyond me. When the vaccine for polio was found, the March of Dimes shifted their energy into treatment and prevention of birth defects. I look forward to the day NMSS can take on another cause, or dismantle itself. Take care! Sylvia
Response:
Question:
How do you find the time o read all that. I love to read, but can barely nuster the time to read anything, much less so many mags:) You are very lucky you have that time to read. I am envious:) — claudia 550/370/157 A malcontent and proud of it! Low fat rocks! For Claudia’s Cooking Newsletter celebrating low fat, sugar free cooking and living visit http://cookingnewsletter.ecorp.net
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :) (i’m only listing those relating to diet/body image, not ALL our magazines) :) I read: BBW Mode Fit Shape Fitness Weight Watchers Self Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman There’s a magazine out there (I got it twice, but now I can’t find it anymore) it was a magazine of all SUCCESS STORIES…. I wish I could find it to subscribe. What an inspiration it was!! –roseanne — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :) (i’m only listing those relating to diet/body image, not ALL our magazines) :)
None, regularly. If they have a feature on how to do intersting things with very long hair without an extra pair of hands, I might buy one, or tips on altering out of style clothing into in style clothing…stuff like that. — "There’s a seeker born every minute."
Response:
What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :)
Fit Shape Fitness
Add Walking mag to the list too.
Response:
to the giant emperor penguin, who stood awaiting an answer, (Roseanne Liska) said: : BBW : Mode : Fit : Shape : Fitness : Weight Watchers : Self : Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love : being a woman my roommate and I read most of these. I personally like Shape a lot, but I’m usually disappointed with their "success stories". I’d much rather read about a woman going from 300 lbs. to 180 lbs. than a 140 lb. woman dropping 20 lbs. But if you read their submission guidelines, they won’t consider your success story unless you send in an ‘after’ picture of yourself wearing tight workout clothes. in other words, you better be -skinny- or else we don’t consider you enough of a success. just a little rant. Mode, oh how i love Mode. what a good magazine. cindy
Response:
What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :) (i’m only listing those relating to diet/body image, not ALL our magazines) :) I read: BBW Mode Fit Shape Fitness Weight Watchers Self Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman There’s a magazine out there (I got it twice, but now I can’t find it anymore) it was a magazine of all SUCCESS STORIES…. I wish I could find it to subscribe. What an inspiration it was!! –roseanne — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
Cindy, You’re kidding!!?? I have never read the submission guidelines for their success stories..!! You’re right, that sucks. So if you go from 500 pounds to 200 pounds one is not a success? I think that is a bigger success than I could ever hope to be…!! –roseanne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – to the giant emperor penguin, who stood awaiting an answer, (Roseanne Liska) said: : BBW : Mode : Fit : Shape : Fitness : Weight Watchers : Self : Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love : being a woman my roommate and I read most of these. I personally like Shape a lot, but I’m usually disappointed with their "success stories". I’d much rather read about a woman going from 300 lbs. to 180 lbs. than a 140 lb. woman dropping 20 lbs. But if you read their submission guidelines, they won’t consider your success story unless you send in an ‘after’ picture of yourself wearing tight workout clothes. in other words, you better be -skinny- or else we don’t consider you enough of a success. just a little rant. Mode, oh how i love Mode. what a good magazine. cindy
– http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
Claudia, I usually read them in bed at night before I fall asleep. I cannot read books in bed, b/c I am not awake enough to follow the plot, I need something short and full of pictures to read…. While I’m waiting for dinner to cook, while I wait for my Email to download, etc… I LOVE to read, so I just make time :) You should see my husbands list of magazines (and he works 2 full time jobs) hahahaha. :) –roseanne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – How do you find the time o read all that. I love to read, but can barely nuster the time to read anything, much less so many mags:) You are very lucky you have that time to read. I am envious:) — claudia 550/370/157 A malcontent and proud of it! Low fat rocks! For Claudia’s Cooking Newsletter celebrating low fat, sugar free cooking and living visit http://cookingnewsletter.ecorp.net What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :) (i’m only listing those relating to diet/body image, not ALL our magazines) :) I read: BBW Mode Fit Shape Fitness Weight Watchers Self Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman There’s a magazine out there (I got it twice, but now I can’t find it anymore) it was a magazine of all SUCCESS STORIES…. I wish I could find it to subscribe. What an inspiration it was!! –roseanne — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
– http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
roseanne, your read, like i do, at every available moment! and when its not in print, its on the web! i read when the family is watching television, in the morning with coffee, in the afternoon, after clients, etc etc etc . tom has a pile next to his favorite chair, just like i do! Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Claudia, I usually read them in bed at night before I fall asleep. I cannot read books in bed, b/c I am not awake enough to follow the plot, I need something short and full of pictures to read…. While I’m waiting for dinner to cook, while I wait for my Email to download, etc… I LOVE to read, so I just make time :) You should see my husbands list of magazines (and he works 2 full time jobs) hahahaha. :) –roseanne How do you find the time o read all that. I love to read, but can barely nuster the time to read anything, much less so many mags:) You are very lucky you have that time to read. I am envious:) — claudia 550/370/157 A malcontent and proud of it! Low fat rocks! For Claudia’s Cooking Newsletter celebrating low fat, sugar free cooking and living visit http://cookingnewsletter.ecorp.net What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :) (i’m only listing those relating to diet/body image, not ALL our magazines) :) I read: BBW Mode Fit Shape Fitness Weight Watchers Self Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman There’s a magazine out there (I got it twice, but now I can’t find it anymore) it was a magazine of all SUCCESS STORIES…. I wish I could find it to subscribe. What an inspiration it was!! –roseanne — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!! — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
dear cindy, i agree with your assessment of SHAPE magazine! i skip it now! i review several magazines a month both in print and on the informed! i am a WOW= thats mom upside down or a WISER, OLDER, WOMEN! Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – to the giant emperor penguin, who stood awaiting an answer, (Roseanne Liska) said: : BBW : Mode : Fit : Shape : Fitness : Weight Watchers : Self : Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love : being a woman my roommate and I read most of these. I personally like Shape a lot, but I’m usually disappointed with their "success stories". I’d much rather read about a woman going from 300 lbs. to 180 lbs. than a 140 lb. woman dropping 20 lbs. But if you read their submission guidelines, they won’t consider your success story unless you send in an ‘after’ picture of yourself wearing tight workout clothes. in other words, you better be -skinny- or else we don’t consider you enough of a success. just a little rant. Mode, oh how i love Mode. what a good magazine. cindy
Response:
Rosie, Is it an inherited hobby? :) My mother reads like us too!! I carry my las vegas bag with me everywhere and in it are usually 3 or 4 magazines I haven’t read yet, 2 books (the one i’m reading and one in case i finish the one i’m reading), the day’s newspaper and a few odds and ends (like bills i need to mail or whatever… I usually only get to read a few pages at a time, but i squeeze it in between things…. and like you, when it’s not in print it’s on the web…. in between calls all day i’m reading my newsgroups and web zines.. darnit after all this reading i should be smarter!!!! hahahahaha –roseanne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – roseanne, your read, like i do, at every available moment! and when its not in print, its on the web! i read when the family is watching television, in the morning with coffee, in the afternoon, after clients, etc etc etc . tom has a pile next to his favorite chair, just like i do! Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie
– http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
Sorry, the only magazines I read are Newsweek and Smithsonian. — Debbie Cusick see pictures of me and my son Brock at http://asd.dozer.com/bio
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :)
Response:
I read just about every free minute too, but mostly novels. I find them more satisfying than magazines which generally I don’t care for – though I read Newsweek so I have some handle on what’s happening in the world, and I read Smithsonian because it is the only magazine I love. However in the old days I was often reduced to reading the backs of cereal boxes at breakfast if there was nothing else around. Now that I am LC and no longer eat cereal I have to make sure reading material is always available. That was the the *one* (and only) thing I did like when I commuted to NYC – all the reading I got to do on the train. — Debbie Cusick see pictures of me and my son Brock at http://asd.dozer.com/bio – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Rosie, Is it an inherited hobby? :) My mother reads like us too!! I carry my las vegas bag with me everywhere and in it are usually 3 or 4 magazines I haven’t read yet, 2 books (the one i’m reading and one in case i finish the one i’m reading), the day’s newspaper and a few odds and ends (like bills i need to mail or whatever…
Response:
I read People every week and Time and Newsweek when there is something happening I am intersted in. I have a subscription to Good Housekeeping and Life, but they are stacked up becuse I ahve no time to read them. I usually have a novel I am reading. I read a great deal in December and August because they are vaca months for me, so I have a lot more time. — claudia
I’ve been reading a lot online. The N.Y. Times, Washington Post, Variety and the two local papers as well as the daily newspaper for "The Young & Restless." I have trouble at the library. I never know what to pick. Sometimes I bring home Town & Country and Architectural Digest to study the ads. — Diva A glass may look half empty But it’s really half full
Response:
Science Science News Scientific American American Journal of Clinical Nutrition JAMA NEJOM Reader’s Digest When I can find the time. Mostly I xerox articles to read when I have some time. I figure I will get to most of them by 2005 ;^) K in Cali
Response:
Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman
I love Marie Claire – it’s become my second favorite, right after New Woman. JK On Atkins Induction – Eternally I used to have a handle on life, but it broke.
Response:
dear deb, LOL! every year i switch from TIME, NEWSWEEK, US NEWS AND WORLD Smithsonian and national geographic are musts in this house also! happy turkey day! rosie
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sorry, the only magazines I read are Newsweek and Smithsonian. — Debbie Cusick see pictures of me and my son Brock at http://asd.dozer.com/bio What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :)
Response:
I read People every week and Time and Newsweek when there is something happening I am intersted in. I have a subscription to Good Housekeeping and Life, but they are stacked up becuse I ahve no time to read them. I usually have a novel I am reading. I read a great deal in December and August because they are vaca months for me, so I have a lot more time. — claudia 550/370/157 A malcontent and proud of it! Low fat rocks! For Claudia’s Cooking Newsletter celebrating low fat, sugar free cooking and living visit http://cookingnewsletter.ecorp.net
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sorry, the only magazines I read are Newsweek and Smithsonian. — Debbie Cusick see pictures of me and my son Brock at http://asd.dozer.com/bio What magazines do you read to better your diet/health and esteem??? :)
Response:
roseanne, there is no doubt in my mind that reading does improve the mind! after i am done with all the mags, i recycle them through my family (nine brothers and sisters) and then they go to a recycling center, so they get alot of miles! being around well read people, is what i do for fun! and i do believe that the love of reading is a gift, and the lust for knowledge is a learned one! happy thanksgiving! rosie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Rosie, Is it an inherited hobby? :) My mother reads like us too!! I carry my las vegas bag with me everywhere and in it are usually 3 or 4 magazines I haven’t read yet, 2 books (the one i’m reading and one in case i finish the one i’m reading), the day’s newspaper and a few odds and ends (like bills i need to mail or whatever… I usually only get to read a few pages at a time, but i squeeze it in between things…. and like you, when it’s not in print it’s on the web…. in between calls all day i’m reading my newsgroups and web zines.. darnit after all this reading i should be smarter!!!! hahahahaha –roseanne roseanne, your read, like i do, at every available moment! and when its not in print, its on the web! i read when the family is watching television, in the morning with coffee, in the afternoon, after clients, etc etc etc . tom has a pile next to his favorite chair, just like i do! Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie — http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
I read just about every free minute too, but mostly novels. I find them more satisfying than magazines which generally I don’t care for – though I read Newsweek so I have some handle on what’s happening in the world, and I read Smithsonian because it is the only magazine I love.
Me, too. I sometimes read mags like Scientific American or Popular Science, Time or Newsweek, used to read my mother’s American Journal of Nursing when she was done with them. Maybe even Omni or Discover, but no fashion/diet women’s magazines. I used to have a friend whose parents always subcribed him to Smithsonian, and he would give them to me when he was done with them, I loved those, too. However in the old days I was often reduced to reading the backs of cereal boxes at breakfast if there was nothing else around. Now that I am LC and no longer eat cereal I have to make sure reading material is always available.
I used to do that, too, especially when I was a kid. I spend a lot of time at the used bookstores, picking up a dozen or more paperbacks at a time. I get a lot of books at garage sales, too. I do have one reading vice, though….I read Weekly World News. I think it’s much funnier than magazines intended to be humor magazines. — "There’s a seeker born every minute."
Response:
jamie- now there is a title i don’t think i have ever heard Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I read just about every free minute too, but mostly novels. I find them more satisfying than magazines which generally I don’t care for – though I read Newsweek so I have some handle on what’s happening in the world, and I read Smithsonian because it is the only magazine I love. Me, too. I sometimes read mags like Scientific American or Popular Science, Time or Newsweek, used to read my mother’s American Journal of Nursing when she was done with them. Maybe even Omni or Discover, but no fashion/diet women’s magazines. I used to have a friend whose parents always subcribed him to Smithsonian, and he would give them to me when he was done with them, I loved those, too. However in the old days I was often reduced to reading the backs of cereal boxes at breakfast if there was nothing else around. Now that I am LC and no longer eat cereal I have to make sure reading material is always available. I used to do that, too, especially when I was a kid. I spend a lot of time at the used bookstores, picking up a dozen or more paperbacks at a time. I get a lot of books at garage sales, too. I do have one reading vice, though….I read Weekly World News. I think it’s much funnier than magazines intended to be humor magazines. — "There’s a seeker born every minute."
Response:
diva, being an avid reader of architectural digest ( i have subscribed for the last five years) i am really, really, curious? why are you interested in the ads? Low carb? Low calorie? Low fat? Low glycemic? 50yr/female/5′10"/wearing size 14 jeans! I am learning HOW to eat, WHAT to eat, and WHY I eat! EATING IS NOT AN EVENT ! http://www.winternet.com/~terrym/sobriety.html ATKINS-BERSTEIN-HELLER-GITTLEMAN-DESMAISONS-EADES-ARNOT STEWARD-BETHEA-ANDREWS-BARART-EZRIN-KOWALSKI Read and Post, everyday! Rosie
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I read People every week and Time and Newsweek when there is something happening I am intersted in. I have a subscription to Good Housekeeping and Life, but they are stacked up becuse I ahve no time to read them. I usually have a novel I am reading. I read a great deal in December and August because they are vaca months for me, so I have a lot more time. — claudia I’ve been reading a lot online. The N.Y. Times, Washington Post, Variety and the two local papers as well as the daily newspaper for "The Young & Restless." I have trouble at the library. I never know what to pick. Sometimes I bring home Town & Country and Architectural Digest to study the ads. — Diva A glass may look half empty But it’s really half full
Response:
we have a ton of non diet magazines too…. Linux Review Linux Times Smart Reseller PC Week Info Week Apache Weekly Linux Journal Visual Basic Journal Computer User PC Computing Sociology Review Sociological Times Internet Business People People is mine the rest are my hubby’s…. :) Science Science News Scientific American American Journal of Clinical Nutrition JAMA NEJOM Reader’s Digest When I can find the time. Mostly I xerox articles to read when I have some time. I figure I will get to most of them by 2005 ;^) K in Cali
– http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
Mega Mag Stuff Prerequisites for any women’s magazine: One diet article three fat recipe articles one fashion feature on seasonal clothes one "how to" column relating to men: how to catch them, keep them, bed them one medical column one decorating column one"so and so answers your questions" lots of cosmetic ads sometimes a political article "Was Dan Quayle right about Family Values?" one travel article one romantic short story 56 cosmetic ads one feminist column one "techie" column about microwave ovens or computers one ‘incurable disease feature, usually about a child one "hair" article What did I forget? — Diva A glass may look half empty But it’s really half full
Response:
i like the stories they have….!! They always have such great stories about women all over the world. And if I remember correctly, none of their stories are continued in the back of the magazine…. (or am i thinking of another one?) Marie Claire — they have such great articles on women, makes you love being a woman I love Marie Claire – it’s become my second favorite, right after New Woman. JK On Atkins Induction – Eternally I used to have a handle on life, but it broke.
– http://www.spectrum-computers.com http://www.webcreations-va.com Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Response:
:we have a ton of non diet magazines too…. : :Linux Review :Linux Times :Smart Reseller 
C Week :Info Week :Apache Weekly :Linux Journal :Visual Basic Journal :Computer User C Computing :Sociology Review :Sociological Times :Internet Business eople : eople is mine the rest are my hubby’s…. :) Could you please ask your hubby if the study mentioned in I think it was "Science News, Oct 17, 1998" was published in any journal he happens to read? (ie Sociology Review or Sociological Times) It was a study about newsgroup participation. Thanks, K in Cali :
: : Science : Science News : Scientific American : American Journal of Clinical Nutrition : JAMA : NEJOM : Reader’s Digest : : When I can find the time. Mostly I xerox articles to read when I have some : time. I figure I will get to most of them by 2005 ;^) : : K in Cali : : : :– : :http://www.spectrum-computers.com :http://www.webcreations-va.com : :Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design : :From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!! : : :
Response:
Question:
Attention Bastards/FOBs/Birthpeople/paps/and people Everywhere: Sign an organ donor card. Let your next of kin know of your wishes. (And you can always donate blood or bone marrow while you’re still alive. The Red Cross needs minority bone marrow donors!) Politically correct speaking aside, it may be the ultimate reunification–or A SINGLE WAY to put a good spin on a lousy world where we are denied "Mortal Kontakt" with our biological families. Dave "Can anyone spare their Pancreas" Sipley Baastard Nation Dan Quayle Spelling Scholarship Committee Chairman – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release: Contact: Deb Schwarz 415-931-0844 Terminally Ill Adult Adoptees Denied Medical Information Rally For "No More Secrets and Lies"
Response:
PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release: Contact: Deb Schwarz 415-931-0844 Terminally Ill Adult Adoptees Denied Medical Information Rally For "No More Secrets and Lies" Bastard Nation is pleased to announce T.I.E.S., the Terminal Illness Emergency Search program. Bastard Nation has assembled a team of professional and volunteer Internet searchers across the nation who have donated their time and expertise to searching for birthfamily members of those with a terminal illness. In the last month, there have been several reunions as a result of the program-last week a terminally ill adoptee in San Francisco was just happily reunited with his father after being separated for 33 years. He will be at the open records rally on Saturday, March 1 (see below) and is available for interview. The T.I.E.S program is in response to the need for adult adoptees (ill and otherwise) to have direct access to their original birth certificates. In all but two states in the U.S. (Kansas and Alaska), adult adoptees are forbidden from accessing their birth certificate (and thus vital medical, heritage and identity information) thanks to archaic depression-era laws which mandated that adoptee birth certificates be falsified and sealed, allegedly to protect the adoptee from the shame of their "illegitimate" heritage. Until these archaic laws are changed, TIES (and its network of searchers), is helping terminally ill adult adoptees who need vital medical history information and a sense of their identity-before it’s too late. To help generate public awareness of TIES and the sealed records travesty, an Open Records Rally will be held outside the showing of the Oscar nominated film "Secrets and Lies". When: Saturday, March 1, from noon to 4 pm. (3 blocks west of Masonic) Bastard Nation is the fastest-growing international adoptee-rights movement in the adoption reform movement today. Visit our website at http://www.bastards.org/ for information on our mission and services to the adoptee community, including the Terminal Illness Emergency Search (TIES) program, Internet Activism Workshops, RegDay involvement and more.
Response:
Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Certainly. The man is unfit to "preside". Maybe we should work to have him impeached. on what grounds? just because YOU think he is unfit? _ ____
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Fuck Bill Clinton! — -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — . _ ____ -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — .
Response:
Bob, A book has been written supporting your thesis. For a full comparison read "Drug Warriors and Their Prey: From Police Power to Police State" by Richard Lawrence Miller , Praeger ISBN 0-275-95042-5 This is a thoroughly researched historical parallel between Nazi law and modern drug law, between the searching out of Jews and the searching out of drug users, between the denial of employment to Jews and the denial of employment to drug users, between the confiscation of Jewish property and the confiscation of drug users’ property, between the incarceration of 1% of the German population, and the incarceration of hundreds of thousands of drug users and distributors. Miller points to the use of the Jews in the development of the Nazi state. "Jews," as a category of people, served as a focus for fears that were used to justify the expansion of state powers. He points out that a critical step in finding a solution to "the Jewish question," or "the Jewish problem," was the creation of a consensus among Germans that there WAS a Jewish problem. "Jews" were said to cause crime, spread disease by sexual promiscuity, and undermine economic productivity. It was said that "Jews" were terrorists and created emergencies that warranted powerful new laws. Bureaucratic rivals within the German state competed for power, prestige, and resources by developing newer or more dramatic anti-Jewish measures than their opponents. Political rivals within the Nazi establishment competed for attention in making new claims that the "Jews" were a threat, that they were creating a crisis in German society that demanded a solution. Similarly, the contemporary need to find a solution to the drug "problem" has been carefully constructed, with the assistance of the news media, the educational establishment, business groups, and special interests. There is, however, no moral or constitutional justification for present policies that attempt to define an entire "troublesome" class of people (drug users), persecute them, and banish them from society. Most of the above text was written by Eric Sterling and E.J. Pagel. Simon – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler. That notwithstanding, it’s really only a press support myth that Clinton supports drugs. Clinton has a long track record of taking a hard line on drugs, even pot. He has lead an administration that has: 1. Very active Fed Law Enforcement – FBI / BATF. - War on drugs - Campaign on militias - Campaign against "White Supremacy" groups - Major efforts on international terrorism - War on local Terrorism - V-Chip - Encryption Export Regs 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with: - Support for two tier cocaine sentencing standard (Also supported by courts) - Support for mandatory sentencing guidelines for drug dealers (Also supported by courts) - Empowerment of BATF and FBI in drug cases, such as impounding property without due process. (Somewhat supported, may have to release a bunch of dealers) 3. Local Police have enjoyed more power during Clinton’s Admin - Added thousands of Cops - Support for Road Blocks to catch Drunk Drivers (Also supported by courts) - Gun Control every place possible - Brady Bill - Spousal Abuse Clause - National Manhunt on Militias (Replaced Cults of the 80’s) - Supported relaxed Search, Maranda, Warrant Processes 4. Empowered Border Patrol and Military to take more aggressive actions against illegal aliens and drugs over the borders. I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue: Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens? If the answer is yes to either, then Clinton will support it. Watch out for the "popularity factor". This quantum aspect is what fools many Clinton followers. While the General Clinton Relativity Test will provide a general answer, if it is wildly unpopular after his spin machine has had a decent chance to sell it then he’ll reverse, no matter how many supporters it leaves in the cold. Drugs are a great tool for Clinton, it’s popular to bust "bad guys", the citizens can be scared into giving up all kinds of rights, and convinced to fund wonderful government programs. We can throw all those pesky inner-city folks in jail (the ultimate welfare program) and spawn another whole chunk of Government ready to come in a "help" or at least "feel the pain" of those not in jail. Drugs are the best thing for Government since Communists, now that the commies are no fun anymore they had to create a new "master bad guy". Commies are a hard act to follow, drugs were not enough to replace the fear of commies, the Governments old standby for seizing or exercising unreasonable power, so they had to throw in the militias, hate groups, local gangs and international terrorists, oh my, I almost forgot, there is the dreaded drunk driver, public enemy number 2. Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
In the end people get the government they deserve. Read "The Weapon Shops of Isher" by A.E. vanVogt Simon
Response:
I think the argument in the case of 209 is an equal-protection-of-the-law thing. Kind of like the Colorado constitutional amendment that prohibited homosexual citizens from using legislative channels. The constitutional argument against of 209 is that it singles out gender- and ethnicity-based factions from using the tools of legislation. By using the initiative route, California’s electoral majority has tilted the *political* playing field.
This is how it reads: Text of Proposition 209 a) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting. Looks like an anti-discrimination law to me. No wonder the voters passed it. Max Kennedy
Response:
…snip… The above is the some total of your contribution in substance. You are so impressive, your points so witty and accurate. Yes, JB you have once again demonstrated your intelligence, why you are so special that I bet you get to take the short bus to school. BobJ.
I wasn’t trying to be funny or witty, and it’s not once again. This is a first for me. I was just pointing out that your arguments trying to defend Clinton’s drug policy are fallacious. Why so defensive Bob? JB
Response:
)Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating )current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, )by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for )medicinal purposes. ) Is this true? What a slimeball. I thought he was promising to let up on the idiotic drug war?
Nah, he’s still holding the same stupid position he has right along. Did you know that marijuana is Schedule One, but Methamphetimines is schedule 2? That’s right, folks–the feds think weed is more dangerous than meth! Meth is a seriously evil drug that fucks people up massively. It amazes me that anyone could argue against marijuana being legal, much less argue against it being legal for medicinal purposes. Marijuana is not physically addictive, and it does much less to impair a person than other prescription drugs.
We’re not even talking legalization here, but simple decriminalization for medical purposes. But you may have noticed that the Feds haven’t tried to file suit against California or Arizona. The reason for this is simple: if they challenge the consitutionality of the laws that just passed, they will lose. Decriminalizing marijuana for medical purposes violates nobody’s civil rights. Guess people will just stick with drinking booze, killing people while under the influence, beating their wives while drunk, stabbing people in barfights, etc… instead. Alcohol – the "good" drug.
"The attempt to silence a man is the greatest honor you can bestow on him. It means that you recognize his superiority to yourself." – Joseph Sobran, Universal Press Syndicate Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
Bob in what area of the Clinton Whitehouse do you work? …Propaganda snipped for brevity…. what about Al Gore’s son being busted for selling pot? What about Roger Clinton? …snip…snip….snip… you just spent a lot of time telling us what his stand is. Obviously, You are not subjected to random drug and alcohol testing like flights attendants are. Flight attendants for Christ’s sake! Bullshit J.B.
The above is the some total of your contribution in substance. You are so impressive, your points so witty and accurate. Yes, JB you have once again demonstrated your intelligence, why you are so special that I bet you get to take the short bus to school. BobJ.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Fuck Bill Clinton! NOT, mind you, that I disagree with your viewpoint, but could you be a bit more articulate?
Certainly. The man is unfit to "preside". Maybe we should work to have him impeached. — -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — . _ ____ -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — .
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s not difficult: the lawfully-enacted decisions of The People shall only be respected when they happen to coincide with the will of Bill Clinton. Both of these issues will, of course, head to the Supremes. I’m personally looking forward to the Administration trying to explain how, exactly, Prop 209 is unconstitutional. The Prop 215 case will make a fascinating study of how the Supremes view states’ rights. I’m not so sure, Paul. Several of the current Supreme Court justices don’t much seem to care anymore about justifying their decisions with coherent reasoning or in basing them in traditional notions of constitutional law. Look what the majority did in Romer v. Evans. Some of the justices seem just to be looking for excuses to uphold the laws they like, and to strike down the ones they don’t, regardless of the Constitution… I predict that the Court will strike down Prop. 209 and uphold California and Arizona’s legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes- not because there’s any constitutional reason to do either, but merely because that’s where the majority of the justices’ political sympathies lie.
That begs the question: Where does the government derive the authority to outlaw marijuana? I mean, how is it that pot is illegal and alcohol is legal? If they are basing the prohibition of pot on medical dangers, surely Alcohol poses at least as significant a danger to the nation’s health. I would argue that alcohol is much worse. We can see the damage that it does. I hope the marijuana issue makes it to the supreme court. At least then there could be some high level discussion of the issue, rather than uneducated pinheads like Gerald Soloman deciding drug policy. Read his comments on drug legalization from last january, they are pretty laughable. He it a true dumbshit. John
Tom Steegmann www.netheaven.com/~steegman Don’t bother sending me junk mail. That goes for spammers, MLM’s, gun nutz, and all of you in the Blak Helikopter Krowd If you need to get in touch with me in a hurry, contact Blak Helikopter # UN1096459823E1209695883861094, and ask for unit 489TS1092469. I’ll be manning the mind kontrol machine. Go Bills!
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Fuck Bill Clinton!
NOT, mind you, that I disagree with your viewpoint, but could you be a bit more articulate? — -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — . _ ____ -.-. .-.. .. -. – — -. … ..- -.-. -.- … -… .. –. - .. — .
"The attempt to silence a man is the greatest honor you can bestow on him. It means that you recognize his superiority to yourself." – Joseph Sobran, Universal Press Syndicate Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
It’s not difficult: the lawfully-enacted decisions of The People shall only be respected when they happen to coincide with the will of Bill Clinton. Both of these issues will, of course, head to the Supremes. I’m personally looking forward to the Administration trying to explain how, exactly, Prop 209 is unconstitutional. The Prop 215 case will make a fascinating study of how the Supremes view states’ rights.
I’m not so sure, Paul. Several of the current Supreme Court justices don’t much seem to care anymore about justifying their decisions with coherent reasoning or in basing them in traditional notions of constitutional law. Look what the majority did in Romer v. Evans. Some of the justices seem just to be looking for excuses to uphold the laws they like, and to strike down the ones they don’t, regardless of the Constitution… I predict that the Court will strike down Prop. 209 and uphold California and Arizona’s legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes- not because there’s any constitutional reason to do either, but merely because that’s where the majority of the justices’ political sympathies lie. John
Response:
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler. That notwithstanding, it’s really only a press support myth that Clinton supports drugs. Clinton has a long track record of taking a hard line on drugs, even pot. He has lead an administration that has: 1. Very active Fed Law Enforcement – FBI / BATF. – War on drugs – Campaign on militias – Campaign against "White Supremacy" groups – Major efforts on international terrorism – War on local Terrorism – V-Chip – Encryption Export Regs 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with: – Support for two tier cocaine sentencing standard (Also supported by courts) – Support for mandatory sentencing guidelines for drug dealers (Also supported by courts) – Empowerment of BATF and FBI in drug cases, such as impounding property without due process. (Somewhat supported, may have to release a bunch of dealers) 3. Local Police have enjoyed more power during Clinton’s Admin – Added thousands of Cops – Support for Road Blocks to catch Drunk Drivers (Also supported by courts) – Gun Control every place possible – Brady Bill – Spousal Abuse Clause – National Manhunt on Militias (Replaced Cults of the 80’s) – Supported relaxed Search, Maranda, Warrant Processes 4. Empowered Border Patrol and Military to take more aggressive actions against illegal aliens and drugs over the borders. I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue: Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens? If the answer is yes to either, then Clinton will support it. Watch out for the "popularity factor". This quantum aspect is what fools many Clinton followers. While the General Clinton Relativity Test will provide a general answer, if it is wildly unpopular after his spin machine has had a decent chance to sell it then he’ll reverse, no matter how many supporters it leaves in the cold. Drugs are a great tool for Clinton, it’s popular to bust "bad guys", the citizens can be scared into giving up all kinds of rights, and convinced to fund wonderful government programs. We can throw all those pesky inner-city folks in jail (the ultimate welfare program) and spawn another whole chunk of Government ready to come in a "help" or at least "feel the pain" of those not in jail. Drugs are the best thing for Government since Communists, now that the commies are no fun anymore they had to create a new "master bad guy". Commies are a hard act to follow, drugs were not enough to replace the fear of commies, the Governments old standby for seizing or exercising unreasonable power, so they had to throw in the militias, hate groups, local gangs and international terrorists, oh my, I almost forgot, there is the dreaded drunk driver, public enemy number 2. Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Organization HSH Associates Distribution: Organization: Countdown to ‘97 – Quayle for Prez Lines: 31 X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0] : Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating : current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, : by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for : medicinal purposes. : : Two weeks ago, at a news conference, he promised to fight Prop 209, : soundly approved by California voters, in the courts. A few *minutes* : later, at the same news conference, he found it necessary to lecture : Serbian strongman Milosevic, saying "Elections should be : be respected and the voice of the people should be heard; and : the human, political, and civil rights of the people should be : respected…. Our sympathies are always with free people who : are struggling to express their freedom and want to have the : integrity of their elections respected." : : Only Clinton could get away with such open hypocrisy. "The integrity of : their elections respected" indeed. It’s not difficult: the lawfully-enacted decisions of The People shall only be respected when they happen to coincide with the will of Bill Clinton. Both of these issues will, of course, head to the Supremes. I’m personally looking forward to the Administration trying to explain how, exactly, Prop 209 is unconstitutional. The Prop 215 case will make a fascinating study of how the Supremes view states’ rights.
I agree, both issues will likely wind up in the Supreme Court (no question that Prop 209 will), but what is Prop 215? [I live on the right coast, not the left. :) ] "We can look forward to four more years of wonderful, inspirational speeches full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection, plus more goddamn nonsense." David Brinkley, ABC News, after Clinton clinched his re-election.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Organization Netcom Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler. That notwithstanding, it’s really only a press support myth that Clinton supports drugs. Clinton has a long track record of taking a hard line on drugs, even pot. He has lead an administration that has: 1. Very active Fed Law Enforcement – FBI / BATF. – War on drugs – Campaign on militias – Campaign against "White Supremacy" groups – Major efforts on international terrorism – War on local Terrorism – V-Chip – Encryption Export Regs 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with: – Support for two tier cocaine sentencing standard (Also supported by courts) – Support for mandatory sentencing guidelines for drug dealers (Also supported by courts) – Empowerment of BATF and FBI in drug cases, such as impounding property without due process. (Somewhat supported, may have to release a bunch of dealers) 3. Local Police have enjoyed more power during Clinton’s Admin – Added thousands of Cops – Support for Road Blocks to catch Drunk Drivers (Also supported by courts) – Gun Control every place possible – Brady Bill – Spousal Abuse Clause – National Manhunt on Militias (Replaced Cults of the 80’s) – Supported relaxed Search, Maranda, Warrant Processes 4. Empowered Border Patrol and Military to take more aggressive actions against illegal aliens and drugs over the borders. I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue: Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens? This last phrase hit the nail on the head. Clinton and his cronies will do anything to increase the power and presence of the Federal government in the day to day lives of the citizens of this country. He trotted out Shalala, McCaffrey, and Reno to give a press conference (on C-Span) to explain the any law the states pass is subservient to FEDERAL LAW. What ever happened to the CONSTITUTION (and State’s rights)? Oh yeah, Clinton and his big government pals decided to use it as toilet paper (again).
Reno’s participation is even more ironic considering that she just used her token appearance before the Supreme Court (that all AG’s get) to argue for *increased* police powers. Some Justices were obviously *appalled* as she advocated expanding the authority of police to order *all* occupants out of a car after stopping the vehicle–not just the driver–and even the aged and infirm. Her position here is probably to the right of Pat Buchanan. The irony is that Reno has recently been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. Perhaps someday, an infirm Reno, *hobbled* by Parkinsons, will be ordered out of a car by a hot shot rookie cop who probably never heard of her–and if Clinton has his way, she won’t be able use any "controlled substance" to ease her pain after being *hustled* out of the car. Shocking, just shocking. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If the answer is yes to either, then Clinton will support it. Watch out for the "popularity factor". This quantum aspect is what fools many Clinton followers. While the General Clinton Relativity Test will provide a general answer, if it is wildly unpopular after his spin machine has had a decent chance to sell it then he’ll reverse, no matter how many supporters it leaves in the cold. Drugs are a great tool for Clinton, it’s popular to bust "bad guys", the citizens can be scared into giving up all kinds of rights, and convinced to fund wonderful government programs. We can throw all those pesky inner-city folks in jail (the ultimate welfare program) and spawn another whole chunk of Government ready to come in a "help" or at least "feel the pain" of those not in jail. Drugs are the best thing for Government since Communists, now that the commies are no fun anymore they had to create a new "master bad guy". Commies are a hard act to follow, drugs were not enough to replace the fear of commies, the Governments old standby for seizing or exercising unreasonable power, so they had to throw in the militias, hate groups, local gangs and international terrorists, oh my, I almost forgot, there is the dreaded drunk driver, public enemy number 2. Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
"We can look forward to four more years of wonderful, inspirational speeches full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection, plus more goddamn nonsense." David Brinkley, ABC News, after Clinton clinched his re-election.
Response:
…snip…. Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler.
Bob in what area of the Clinton Whitehouse do you work? …Propaganda snipped for brevity…. 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with:
….more propaganda snippage… what about Al Gore’s son being busted for selling pot? What about Roger Clinton? …snip…snip….snip… I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue:
you just spent a lot of time telling us what his stand is. Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens?
Obviously, You are not subjected to random drug and alcohol testing like flights attendants are. Flight attendants for Christ’s sake! Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
Bullshit J.B.
Response:
: : Only Clinton could get away with such open hypocrisy. "The integrity of : their elections respected" indeed. It’s not difficult: the lawfully-enacted decisions of The People shall only be respected when they happen to coincide with the will of Bill Clinton. Both of these issues will, of course, head to the Supremes. I’m personally looking forward to the Administration trying to explain how, exactly, Prop 209 is unconstitutional. The Prop 215 case will make a fascinating study of how the Supremes view states’ rights.
I think the argument in the case of 209 is an equal-protection-of-the-law thing. Kind of like the Colorado constitutional amendment that prohibited homosexual citizens from using legislative channels. The constitutional argument against of 209 is that it singles out gender- and ethnicity-based factions from using the tools of legislation. By using the initiative route, California’s electoral majority has tilted the *political* playing field. (posted from alt.fan.dan-quayle, cc to author) Jason Christian University of California, Davis Office:(916)752-1357 FAX:(916)752-5614 Davis, CA 95616
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler. That notwithstanding, it’s really only a press support myth that Clinton supports drugs. Clinton has a long track record of taking a hard line on drugs, even pot. He has lead an administration that has: 1. Very active Fed Law Enforcement – FBI / BATF. – War on drugs – Campaign on militias – Campaign against "White Supremacy" groups – Major efforts on international terrorism – War on local Terrorism – V-Chip – Encryption Export Regs 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with: – Support for two tier cocaine sentencing standard (Also supported by courts) – Support for mandatory sentencing guidelines for drug dealers (Also supported by courts) – Empowerment of BATF and FBI in drug cases, such as impounding property without due process. (Somewhat supported, may have to release a bunch of dealers) 3. Local Police have enjoyed more power during Clinton’s Admin – Added thousands of Cops – Support for Road Blocks to catch Drunk Drivers (Also supported by courts) – Gun Control every place possible – Brady Bill – Spousal Abuse Clause – National Manhunt on Militias (Replaced Cults of the 80’s) – Supported relaxed Search, Maranda, Warrant Processes 4. Empowered Border Patrol and Military to take more aggressive actions against illegal aliens and drugs over the borders. I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue: Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens?
This last phrase hit the nail on the head. Clinton and his cronies will do anything to increase the power and presence of the Federal government in the day to day lives of the citizens of this country. He trotted out Shalala, McCaffrey, and Reno to give a press conference (on C-Span) to explain the any law the states pass is subservient to FEDERAL LAW. What ever happened to the CONSTITUTION (and State’s rights)? Oh yeah, Clinton and his big government pals decided to use it as toilet paper (again). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If the answer is yes to either, then Clinton will support it. Watch out for the "popularity factor". This quantum aspect is what fools many Clinton followers. While the General Clinton Relativity Test will provide a general answer, if it is wildly unpopular after his spin machine has had a decent chance to sell it then he’ll reverse, no matter how many supporters it leaves in the cold. Drugs are a great tool for Clinton, it’s popular to bust "bad guys", the citizens can be scared into giving up all kinds of rights, and convinced to fund wonderful government programs. We can throw all those pesky inner-city folks in jail (the ultimate welfare program) and spawn another whole chunk of Government ready to come in a "help" or at least "feel the pain" of those not in jail. Drugs are the best thing for Government since Communists, now that the commies are no fun anymore they had to create a new "master bad guy". Commies are a hard act to follow, drugs were not enough to replace the fear of commies, the Governments old standby for seizing or exercising unreasonable power, so they had to throw in the militias, hate groups, local gangs and international terrorists, oh my, I almost forgot, there is the dreaded drunk driver, public enemy number 2. Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. And yet Slick Willie loves to snort cocaine for his own personal recreational needs… What a hypocrite.
I read an interview once with a mobster who said they were not in favor of ending prohibition. It put them out of business. These things can make sense in other ways besides simple hypocricy. Max Kennedy
Response:
d Followup-To: <"talk.politics.misc,alt.politics,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.activism, alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.correc t,alt.politics.reform,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics,t alk.politics.guns,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democ rats.d,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.women,talk.politics.the ory,alt.flame.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.fan.bob-dole,alt. current-events.usa,alt.conspiracy,alt.politics.m e Distribution: Organization: Countdown to ‘97 – Quayle for Prez Lines: 31 X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0] : Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating : current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, : by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for : medicinal purposes. : : Two weeks ago, at a news conference, he promised to fight Prop 209, : soundly approved by California voters, in the courts. A few *minutes* : later, at the same news conference, he found it necessary to lecture : Serbian strongman Milosevic, saying "Elections should be : be respected and the voice of the people should be heard; and : the human, political, and civil rights of the people should be : respected…. Our sympathies are always with free people who : are struggling to express their freedom and want to have the : integrity of their elections respected." : : Only Clinton could get away with such open hypocrisy. "The integrity of : their elections respected" indeed. It’s not difficult: the lawfully-enacted decisions of The People shall only be respected when they happen to coincide with the will of Bill Clinton. Both of these issues will, of course, head to the Supremes. I’m personally looking forward to the Administration trying to explain how, exactly, Prop 209 is unconstitutional. The Prop 215 case will make a fascinating study of how the Supremes view states’ rights.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Fuck Bill Clinton!
The people elected this moron. The people get the government they deserve.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Let me first say that I am not a Clinton supporter and generally agree that he is a major waffler. That notwithstanding, it’s really only a press support myth that Clinton supports drugs. Clinton has a long track record of taking a hard line on drugs, even pot. He has lead an administration that has: 1. Very active Fed Law Enforcement – FBI / BATF. – War on drugs – Campaign on militias – Campaign against "White Supremacy" groups – Major efforts on international terrorism – War on local Terrorism – V-Chip – Encryption Export Regs 2. Stepped up the War on Drugs at home with: – Support for two tier cocaine sentencing standard (Also supported by courts) – Support for mandatory sentencing guidelines for drug dealers (Also supported by courts) – Empowerment of BATF and FBI in drug cases, such as impounding property without due process. (Somewhat supported, may have to release a bunch of dealers) 3. Local Police have enjoyed more power during Clinton’s Admin – Added thousands of Cops – Support for Road Blocks to catch Drunk Drivers (Also supported by courts) – Gun Control every place possible – Brady Bill – Spousal Abuse Clause – National Manhunt on Militias (Replaced Cults of the 80’s) – Supported relaxed Search, Maranda, Warrant Processes 4. Empowered Border Patrol and Military to take more aggressive actions against illegal aliens and drugs over the borders. I am not sure what Clinton’s stand on Drugs is, but there is a test you can apply determine how Clinton will decide any given issue: Just ask, Will it give the Government more power or reduce the rights of citizens? If the answer is yes to either, then Clinton will support it. Watch out for the "popularity factor". This quantum aspect is what fools many Clinton followers. While the General Clinton Relativity Test will provide a general answer, if it is wildly unpopular after his spin machine has had a decent chance to sell it then he’ll reverse, no matter how many supporters it leaves in the cold. Drugs are a great tool for Clinton, it’s popular to bust "bad guys", the citizens can be scared into giving up all kinds of rights, and convinced to fund wonderful government programs. We can throw all those pesky inner-city folks in jail (the ultimate welfare program) and spawn another whole chunk of Government ready to come in a "help" or at least "feel the pain" of those not in jail. Drugs are the best thing for Government since Communists, now that the commies are no fun anymore they had to create a new "master bad guy". Commies are a hard act to follow, drugs were not enough to replace the fear of commies, the Governments old standby for seizing or exercising unreasonable power, so they had to throw in the militias, hate groups, local gangs and international terrorists, oh my, I almost forgot, there is the dreaded drunk driver, public enemy number 2. Anyway, the only people who have ever said Clinton would be easy on drugs are the press (sells papers) and us Republicans (we don’t like him…), Clintons track record has shown that he has been real hard on drugs. BobJ.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Two weeks ago, at a news conference, he promised to fight Prop 209, soundly approved by California voters, in the courts. A few *minutes* later, at the same news conference, he found it necessary to lecture Serbian strongman Milosevic, saying "Elections should be be respected and the voice of the people should be heard; and the human, political, and civil rights of the people should be respected…. Our sympathies are always with free people who are struggling to express their freedom and want to have the integrity of their elections respected." Only Clinton could get away with such open hypocrisy. "The integrity of their elections respected" indeed. Then last week, he joined numerous liberals and an avalanche of black leaders of various backgrounds in giving Ebonics the bum’s rush (and NO federal funding). Now he has moved to the right of Bob Dole in telling Califonia voters (again) and Arizona voters what he thinks of the "integrity of their elections." He would therefore deny people of these states, no matter how severely ill, the chance to inhale for medical reasons what he once had the opportunity to do for fun–but he declined to inhale <giggle, giggle. Oh my, this guy has more moves than Barry Sanders of the Detroit Lions. Stay tuned…. "Sure, if I could…I tried before." — Bill Clinton, in a 1992 MTV interview, responding to a teenager’s question if Clinton regretted "not inhaling". "We can look forward to four more years of wonderful, inspirational speeches full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection, plus more goddamn nonsense." David Brinkley, ABC News, after Clinton clinched his re-election.
Response:
)Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating )current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, )by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for )medicinal purposes. ) Is this true? What a slimeball. I thought he was promising to let up on the idiotic drug war? It amazes me that anyone could argue against marijuana being legal, much less argue against it being legal for medicinal purposes. Marijuana is not physically addictive, and it does much less to impair a person than other prescription drugs. Guess people will just stick with drinking booze, killing people while under the influence, beating their wives while drunk, stabbing people in barfights, etc… instead. Alcohol – the "good" drug.
Response:
Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
And yet Slick Willie loves to snort cocaine for his own personal recreational needs… What a hypocrite.
Response:
)Bill Clinton, who continues to do an impression of an alterating )current generator, switched back to conservative mode today, )by signaling his intent to fight legalization of marijuana for )medicinal purposes. ) Is this true? What a slimeball. I thought he was promising to let up on the idiotic drug war?
Yes, it’s true. And, yes, I thought we were posting all awhile that Clinton was just as much in favor of the drug war as Bush was. Look what Clinton did to crack sentencing… Raised it sky high. Has no problem pardoning his friends for the same crimes though. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -It amazes me that anyone could argue against marijuana being legal, much less argue against it being legal for medicinal purposes. Marijuana is not physically addictive, and it does much less to impair a person than other prescription drugs. Guess people will just stick with drinking booze, killing people while under the influence, beating their wives while drunk, stabbing people in barfights, etc… instead. Alcohol – the "good" drug.
Response:
Question:
I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information?
1) I was a student of Rod Nash who wrote Wilderness and the American Mind (and of the Club’s history committee), and Al Runte one of his students. 2) Cohen (History of the Sierra Club) is another decent source (not without controversy). 3) About a half a dozen other books on panel 28. The Club without question is the original Yuppie organization decades before the term Yuppie existed (Young urban professional). You can see Berkeley influence from guys like LeConte, et al. even to this day with guys like Rowell. It began as guys smoking and sherry sipping society (quite common in the 1890s). It began as a strictly California organization, but Muir was a good publicist, and he was quick on his political education. I had an interesting question about Muir on a mid-Term in Rod’s class. Muir favored private cars in Yosemite. But in today’s context if you brought Muir to Yosemite today: would he like Yosemite? (to this post, not part of the question, Would he like the Sierra Club?) The TA (Jeff) took issue with my answer. The problem would be whether Muir would have access or education to the events from his death (1914) to the present. Jeff wanted a more "fixed" philosophy answer. Unfortunately Rod gave "grading authority" to the TAs on the midterms keeping the final for himself. Rod gave me a great placating answer: I could come back and teach the class anytime I wanted, because he knew I could do it. And that was from a math major, not a history major. Muir’s vision wasn’t limited to CA. His Alaskan and other world trips were great experiences for him. The interesting thing to me was Muir’s political education. The nuclear physicists from Los Alamos had the same upbringing in 1946. Generations aren’t learning.
Response:
When I was 16 I wanted to backpack soooo bad. My family didn’t even camp much less backpack. A science teacher sponsored me into the Sierra Club and I went on many marvelous hikes with memorable older folks who told tall tales around the campfire. I’ve been hiking all over the western united states since then (am 43). Don’t hike with them anymore, but still belong. Dee
Response:
Your experience will the Club can vary a lot. It tends to be governed by the local Chapter climate. I’ve seen about five operating Chapters. By far and the away, and my first Chapter was the Angeles Chapter. It is probably the most structured, bordering on truly autocratic is some ways (but I can think of even more autocratic outdoor organizations: this is not necessarily bad, but it makes for amusing situations: not the Bob Cram cartoon in Backpacking One Step at a time by Harvey Manning of a bunch of people marching down a trail using an ice ax as a baton: that’s not the SC he’s spoofing). Surprisingly, the three Bay Area chapters closest to the National office are fairly unstructured, and reasonably loose. You will find people who are purely "into it" for the outdoor activity. I’ve listened to LA leaders sneer at the Club "environmentalists" and similarly know politicos who don’t do outdoor activities. LA in particular seems to be influenced by the nature of the industry there: it produced one sociology PhD thesis (Mitchell’s) and LA’s psyche reflects in other writings (like Levy’s book Hackers [he attributed the difference to highly structured aerospace/defense industries]). Meeting at the offices of the DWP doesn’t help either. ;^) That Sierra was published a long time using non-recycled glossy paper, and the little Angeles chapter handbook similarly was criticized (change comes slowly to all large bureaucracies unfortunately). In 1964 the Club was very pro-Nuclear power. To many in the environmental movement, it was perfectly logical at the time. Most of the Club did a 180 degree turn on that, except Ansel Adams (most noted proponent in the Club to the day he died). So does the fact that they did the 180 make them hypocritical? Naw, that just says the finger pointer is more concern with the consistency of an organization than it’s philosophy. Being a member of the Sierra Club does not preclude you from joining say the Auto Club (but I know SCers who think that) or that knowing that Barry Goldwater was once a Life Member. The fanaticism of certain members of the Club is legendary. I doubt I would want it any other way myself. It’s another one of those academic tradition things. You find the people in the Club you want to hang out with, and you hang out. In some ways, I bet Muir would be a little disappointed, and in other ways he’d be impressed. I think far more fanatic (and misunderstood organizations) exist.
Response:
I disagree. I am actively involved with the wilderness Basics Course and run whenever I hear the mention of political stuff. I lead many hikes and never get into anything but good old wilderness stuff. I realize that someone has to do the political business and I appreciate them for it. but there are those that do only the outback stuff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In article "Daniel The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan Hear, hear! I couldn’t agree with you more. Ken B.
Response:
The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan
Response:
The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with.
Depends on the city. For example in L.A. probably far more people are involved in their extension outings program (3000+ trips a year) than environmental activism beyond sending in a check.
Response:
In article The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan
Hear, hear! I couldn’t agree with you more. Ken B.
Response:
Well I ran into a group of sierra clubers this summer. They had more that the allowable 15 so they went in two groups on two different permits and just met in the backcounty to travel together. Very illegal and unethical. They approached some neighboring campers and wanted to give
Oh, I know groups and people like this. Very "social." I avoid them, too. them some of their food. The campers didn’t want it and then the leaders told them that because of the steep climb the next day and the inexperience of the group that they would have to bury the extra food right there in the wilderness. It sounds to me like the Sierra Club needs to learn some wilerness ethics.
The leadership training in the Club is somewhat inconsistent (I’ve had it). The problem is that the base skills are quite widely varied. And the stuff happening with insurance contributes to problems downstream in time. I operate wilderness summer camp for kids 10 to 15 yrs old in the sierra and we teach the kids to travel in small goups and leave no trace as promoted by NOLS. The "Leave No Trace" program by NOLS is a great program and will help preserve our wilderness areas for generations to come. As for the Sierra Club !!!!
NOLS has (Petzolt) certainly had made it’s contribution to the wilderness and climbing specifically: e.g. standardized belay signals. The Club has its strengths and weaknesses. The usual other comparisons include local groups like the CMC/Mountaineers, Mazamas, AMC, the Audubon Society [remember he killed all those birds in order to paint them], the Wilderness Society, the I. Walton League, etc. The real problem is that this type of education does not scale well.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information? 1) I was a student of Rod Nash who wrote Wilderness and the American Mind (and of the Club’s history committee), and Al Runte one of his students. 2) Cohen (History of the Sierra Club) is another decent source (not without controversy). 3) About a half a dozen other books on panel 28. The Club without question is the original Yuppie organization decades before the term Yuppie existed (Young urban professional). You can see Berkeley influence from guys like LeConte, et al. even to this day with guys like Rowell. It began as guys smoking and sherry sipping society (quite common in the 1890s). It began as a strictly California organization, but Muir was a good publicist, and he was quick on his political education. I had an interesting question about Muir on a mid-Term in Rod’s class. Muir favored private cars in Yosemite. But in today’s context if you brought Muir to Yosemite today: would he like Yosemite? (to this post, not part of the question, Would he like the Sierra Club?) The TA (Jeff) took issue with my answer. The problem would be whether Muir would have access or education to the events from his death (1914) to the present. Jeff wanted a more "fixed" philosophy answer. Unfortunately Rod gave "grading authority" to the TAs on the midterms keeping the final for himself. Rod gave me a great placating answer: I could come back and teach the class anytime I wanted, because he knew I could do it. And that was from a math major, not a history major. Muir’s vision wasn’t limited to CA. His Alaskan and other world trips were great experiences for him. The interesting thing to me was Muir’s political education. The nuclear physicists from Los Alamos had the same upbringing in 1946. Generations aren’t learning.
Well I ran into a group of sierra clubers this summer. They had more that the allowable 15 so they went in two groups on two different permits and just met in the backcounty to travel together. Very illegal and unethical. They approached some neighboring campers and wanted to give them some of their food. The campers didn’t want it and then the leaders told them that because of the steep climb the next day and the inexperience of the group that they would have to bury the extra food right there in the wilderness. It sounds to me like the Sierra Club needs to learn some wilerness ethics. I operate wilderness summer camp for kids 10 to 15 yrs old in the sierra and we teach the kids to travel in small goups and leave no trace as promoted by NOLS. The "Leave No Trace" program by NOLS is a great program and will help preserve our wilderness areas for generations to come. As for the Sierra Club !!!! Geo
Response:
Note: there is a difference between the official Club-wide outings listed in the magazine and the outings of local chapters. The listed outings are ridiculously expensive; local outings can be very, very efficient in cost versus what you get.
Very true. For a list of free climbing and hiking activities in California, you can visit these web sites: http://reality.sgi.com/csp/pcs/index.html http://www.edgeinternet.com/sps/index.html The first site (pcs = Peak Climbing Section) contains plain text and postscript versions of a climbing newsletter. You can also get on an email list where hikes and climbs are announced (all free!) by sending this two-line message to info lomap-peak-climbing info lomap-day-hiking The first list carries a plain-text version of the PCS newsletter, with trip reports, gear for sale, private expeditions to other continents, etc. The second list is primarily for the San Francisco and Silicon Valley areas. No charge to subscribe, and no charge for any of the activities (well, maybe you have to reimburse the leader for permit fees, and the big expeditions have travel and guide costs, but the normal stuff is BY DEFINITION free). Enjoy! — SRE * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * ftp: 192.100.81.1 415-508-0500 fax: 415-508-0501 * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * TRY THIS: echo ‘[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq’|dc
Response:
snip dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.).
I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information? to the person inquiring: Might also point out that you get a slick monthly magazine, which is interesting reading. Such a magazine would easily cost the $25 -per yr. National group trips are, I think, cheaper than commercial-for-profit trips. Yet a good place to learn how to cope with the outdoors. The Club has the same overhead as any business: on-going expenses of staff, rent, etc. I’ve volunteered in the Outing Department and seen the volume of requests they handle. Costs at least a couple of dollars to mail a brochure. Joan, San Francisco
Response:
I’m a member of the Sierra Club. They do a LOT to support the security of existing wild areas, and try to create new ones for all to enjoy. I consider THIS to be what my $25 is going to. If you are spending $25 in hopes of joining an outdoors "Network", save your money. All the Sierra Club trips are very costly. I assume this is for insurance purposes and the like, but the fact is, outdoor activity can be done WAY more cheaply than this. If you don’t mind the added expense (an outing will cost about 60% more than you could do it yourself for), I’m sure you will meet many new people. Read the descriptions carefully. Each outing is kinda geared to a particular interest group. If you’re interested in long-distance hiking, don’t go on a birdwatching stroll.
Note: there is a difference between the official Club-wide outings listed in the magazine and the outings of local chapters. The listed outings are ridiculously expensive; local outings can be very, very efficient in cost versus what you get. one of God’s peculiar< people "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, God’s peculiar people." — the Apostle Peter (KJV)
Response:
The Club is quite a mixed organization. Only something around 10% partake in outings. You will find people you will like, and others you will dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.).
I might add that the conservation wing of the Club is somewhat separate from the "outings" (read "activities") wing of the Club. There are major splits, for instance, on desert protection and bolting climbing routes… so don’t assume the first person you talk to is like all the rest! — SRE * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * ftp: 192.100.81.1 415-508-0500 fax: 415-508-0501 * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * TRY THIS: echo ‘[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq’|dc
Response:
If you support the SC philosophy, join anyway to protect the environment. If you just want to see how the activities go, you can join the local hikes without being a member. In the worst case, you might have to pay a dollar or 2 more if there is a cost to the event. However, 99% of all Club events are free. David Eisenberg Hundred Peaks Section, Angeles Chapter http://www.edgeinternet.com/hps/
Response:
The high cost is only for National Outings. 99% of all local activities are free. David Eisenberg Hundred Peaks Section, Angeles Chapter http://www.edgeinternet.com/hps/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a member of the Sierra Club. They do a LOT to support the security of existing wild areas, and try to create new ones for all to enjoy. I consider THIS to be what my $25 is going to. If you are spending $25 in hopes of joining an outdoors "Network", save your money. All the Sierra Club trips are very costly. I assume this is for insurance purposes and the like, but the fact is, outdoor activity can be done WAY more cheaply than this. If you don’t mind the added expense (an outing will cost about 60% more than you could do it yourself for), I’m sure you will meet many new people. Read the descriptions carefully. Each outing is kinda geared to a particular interest group. If you’re interested in long-distance hiking, don’t go on a birdwatching stroll. You get a cool calendar with your membership. Try it for a year to see if you like it. Your $$$ will help out the cause, and you get a cool calendar out of the deal. That’s my advise. =) NTrepiDon
Response:
Hi, I like doing outdoor activities, but lately I haven’t been doing anything because I don’t like doing it alone. So, I have been looking for clubs in Philadelphia area that support these kind of activities. A friend of mine told me that Sierra Club organizes a lot of outdoor activities; and many of them at a discount rate, and I am interested in being a member. I have the form in front of me, but before I commit $25 introductory fee I would like to get a feedback from more experienced members. Thanks. Arbin PS: I support the philosphy of Sierra Club…
Response:
I joined the Sierra Club at the insistence of my wife who had just quit smoking and was going through a vegetarian, tree-hugger phase. I expected to meet a bunch of namby-pamby wine and cheese types. As it turned out, I have never known a group of more experienced backpackers, canoeists, and skiers. I have enjoyed every outing I’ve been on and am a better outdoorsman because of it. My wife and I have since divorced but I’m still a member of the Sierra Club. Craig
Response:
For many trips, membership is not required. Just go on one of those trips. And most meetings tend to be free. The Club is quite a mixed organization. Only something around 10% partake in outings. You will find people you will like, and others you will dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.). Michael Cohen wrote The History of the Sierra Club if you have time to read it. It is popular in some circles and not popular in others.
Response:
I’m a member of the Sierra Club. They do a LOT to support the security of existing wild areas, and try to create new ones for all to enjoy. I consider THIS to be what my $25 is going to. If you are spending $25 in hopes of joining an outdoors "Network", save your money. All the Sierra Club trips are very costly. I assume this is for insurance purposes and the like, but the fact is, outdoor activity can be done WAY more cheaply than this. If you don’t mind the added expense (an outing will cost about 60% more than you could do it yourself for), I’m sure you will meet many new people. Read the descriptions carefully. Each outing is kinda geared to a particular interest group. If you’re interested in long-distance hiking, don’t go on a birdwatching stroll. You get a cool calendar with your membership. Try it for a year to see if you like it. Your $$$ will help out the cause, and you get a cool calendar out of the deal. That’s my advise. =) NTrepiDon
Response: