# Did I hear him right ...?? I can't believe it



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Bush just said on TV
"America is God's gift to the world.........
   

doesn't that just lay it all out for Empire ..anyone that had any illusions about megalomania on Bush's part should reconsider.......the arrogance is unbelievable


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Bush's "divine right" to blow the hell out of Muslims everywhere was the focus of a report by Neil MacDonald last night on CBC. At one point Bush said that this "war on terror" is a "Crusade", a terminology that has been picked up by the entire Middle East, since memories of the Crusades are indeed generational.

I see from the BBC that a few dozen more Iraqi civilians were killed by U.S. "smart" bombs. Ah, technology....

Media coverage in general over the past 24 hours has been decidedly not favourable to the U.S. Lots of questions being raised about the planning of this invasion, many international law experts (including a large group of Canadian lawyers) confirming that this war is illegal, etc.

Bush et al better be sure to purchase their 2004 election victory now, since (a) the people aren't going to elect him based on the state of the world a year from now, (b) the taxpayers are going to be totally freaked by the ongoing costs of war and reconstruction (if the U.S. does not, as it has in Afghanistan, abandon those promises), and (c) if they aren't re-elected / in office, they're damn well going to be facing war crimes charges, if we can find a court that can claim jurisdiction...

See this excellent piece in the Guardian today.


M.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Not even the first time this from a fundamentalist site....even they were shocked

"So, did Bush convert any of you Tuesday?

From: mitchell
Date: 1/30/2003
Time: 4:07:19 PM
Remote Name: 208.63.239.62
Comments

Did I hear him right? Did he actually say,"America is God's gift to the world"? Will all the nations on earth that agree please hold up your hands?! That is an interesting theological claim. Anyone read Redeemer Nation? "


  Wow I'm in total shock - this is such fuel for world conflict


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

I can see where he is coming from.
Go to the Bible in the Old Testament, King David, Solomon, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, etc.
There are 100's of examples what the big picture is.
I can understand why you would balk at this statement......You fellows don't believe in absolute truth, you have been taught truth is a floating point. If there is no God, then truth is different for ever person according to their circumstances......its relative.
If truth is relative than you have opened the door 
to every social infection known to man.
If there is a God, which after 25 years of study, I believe there is....then what is HIS position.
I have found in my travels around the world that
Noth America was one of the only places in the world that sends food, doctors, nurses, teachers, an relief....in HIS name and at great expense to bring hope to the world.......I have seen it, talk to the people who used to eat each other, my aunt s good friend Hazel wrote the book "Through Gates of Splendor" its about a man eating tribe they went to live with in the jungles. She told the story from 2 perspectives, her own actual experience while they were there, and then the Chief and the elders told how they saw it. Listen to what the chief had to say about this.
You need to talk or hear from the recipients of what President Bush talked about before you judge so harshly. If I heard what he said, and was in a 3rd world country which I have, I could say "I look forward to your help" not "how arogant!"
I believe that the anger you have expressed is not surprising considering your current world view.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Sadly Bush would not know the meaning of "arrogant" since God is on his side. 
It would follow with the thinking done for him that the "unwilling" Canada is against the very God of America. 
I'm sure that he and his party apart from the cynical or non Southern Baptist are horrified at the extent of apostasy taking place amongst the unwilling. With his brand of faith, he must deliver the world unto ........ God knows what.
Those who lead the daily whitehouse bible meetings must surely be praying fervently for us.
In case that doesn't work, ambassador Cellucci has
been dispatched to warn us of a petulant reaction from Washington. 
It is truly bizzare that behind the massive bombing of a nation is an aggressor who cries that our "unwillingness" has been hurtful.
Like they care!


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Darrell Rhodes

Do you speak of the one (god) who's a guy with the beard and a dick?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, I did not hear anything that Bush has said today, but the notion of America being "God's gift to the world" stems from the concept of "manifest destiny". We learned this in grade school, and only questioned it en masse during the war in Vietnam. You might also want to read Frederick Jackson Turner's book pertaining to his "frontier hypothesis", published in 1897 (I believe). This laid out the idea of spreading beyond the North American continent (Canada and Mexico were not really considered). Of course, there is also Gibbons' work on the fall of the Roman Empire, but I have a feeling there are not too many in the Bush administration who will pass on the basic thesis of this massive work. Sad.........


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

Marcello.....you must be young
Have you ever stood where the bullets heat seared you face when they passed by.
When death is but a whisper away.............
My arrogance and indestructabilty vanished in the presence of death.........on the fields of battle.
I found myself saying, is this all there is?
Or is there a God.....if there is, what must I know?
Marcello, the valley of the shadow of death will cure you of your penchant of verbal diahrea.
All of us that survived............have experienced in action, a peace that passes all understanding.
I will speak to you graciously, as I was once as you are now, a legend in your own mind.
There is much more to life, it was after death visited that I began to live, I pray that it won't take that to convince you.............


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Darrell Rhodes:
*Marcello.....you must be young
Have you ever stood where the bullets heat seared you face when they passed by.
When death is but a whisper away.............
My arrogance and indestructabilty vanished in the presence of death.........on the fields of battle.
I found myself saying, is this all there is?
Or is there a God.....if there is, what must I know?
Marcello, the valley of the shadow of death will cure you of your penchant of verbal diahrea.
All of us that survived............have experienced in action, a peace that passes all understanding.
I will speak to you graciously, as I was once as you are now, a legend in your own mind.
There is much more to life, it was after death visited that I began to live, I pray that it won't take that to convince you.............*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rhodes,

We are prepared to put up with your gingoistic simple minded bull**** because most of us belive in freedom of speech, and that everybody has the right to hold an opinion, even one as infantile as yours.

But you have been told nicely, to refrain from personal attacks. If you find it that difficult to keep a civil tongue in your head, and insist on degrading others, I will be delighted to dish out some of your own medicine.

As for your suggestion that God is on American's side, I suggest that you ask Him why he chooses to allow tornados, hurricanes, floods, volcano's and drought to harm the US. And while you are at it, why not ask Him (or Her/He/She/It) why Americans are dying in record numbers from vascular disease.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

DarRh
"your penchant of verbal diahrea" sic  
Your experience obviously didn't cure your own "penchant". I'm not young and I've had close friends lost to America's arrogance.  
Don't lay your "religious conversion" on the fields of battle on others who have a differing view of their relation with the universe.
Arrogance...again again from the "chosen" and you don't like it when Macello holds your own pompous post up to ridicule.
•••••
Dr. G Manifest Destiny was a declared policy of 19th Century US with regards to Native American populations.
It was used to justify barbarity and racism and every manner of discrimination that those with the guns could dream up by a variety of Western Nations.
http://www.geocities.com/angryindian/pagemanifest.html 

Didn't the concept come from Cecil Rhodes quoting Kipling about "The White Man's Burden???   
http://www.boondocksnet.com/ai/kipling/kipling.html 

I really thought the planet might be past that.
Where's that slow boat to New Zealand when I need it.. 
It seems we ARE destined to repeat history since the planet hasn't learned from it.
America will work it's way out of this.
Bush is the real problem.........."God's gift to the world"......arrrrgh....


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Rhodes,
Religious dogma and sanctioned murder of any brand turns my stomach although the concept of a "creative intelligence" with the emphasis on intelligence attracts me.
I prefer to keep gender out of it just in case she's cute. 
Nature does a fine job of destruction without our help.
No one speaks for the dead.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, "manifest destiny" officially began with the Monroe Doctrine and "swept awayone/thing in it's path", so to speak. However, it was actually discussed during the time of Washington. The tragedy was mainly to the Native American populations beyond the Mississippi River, but the natural environment and animal life were also seen as being there ("placed by God for our use" was a phrase used during the Robber Barron era of the 1880's) during that period of time, along with anything Spanish, Mexican, French, English, et al. It was NOT a glorious time period in American history, regardless of what some revisionist historian have published. 

Thanks for the URL. An interesting website.


----------



## SWORD (Mar 26, 2003)

Britnell,
It appears you have some issues. 
If you perceive this as an attack, then I would say your sensors are strung to tight, tuned for arguement rather than discussion. Please note that Marcello threw the mud.....if my response in telling of my real life experience offends you, that is your problem....I am excerising my right of free speech. I have paid for my right with my own and the blood those who stood with me. Your freedom of speech was fully paid in blood and sadly must be continually expended. As long as bullies are out there, someone must stand against them. 
As far as freedom of speech.....you can use it like a whip, or use it build and contibute. Chose the high road, the low road is already packed.
You also have freedom to fill your pants in a crowded room, exercise it and note you will repell everyone in your vicinity. Yours words can be used exactly the same way. Your speech can create a vile atmosphere that drives people away or one which is open and valuable discourse. 
I am never offended by reason, knowledge and experience presented in a sensible fashion.
Freedom......is not freedom to abuse people with 
your words, as words have destroyed spirit of many a young person. Verbal abuse breeds people who destroy.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

If America is Gods gift to the world then she has a wicked sense of humour and I'd like to exchange the gift for a cure for cancer. The rate the Bush administration is going, it's going to be hand delivering the world, as a gift, to God.

There is good reason for the separation of church and state. When the two get mixed, we usually get hell on earth. Pardon the biblical reference.

Go shoot some small furry mammals for whoevers sake....


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sword ...oh perfect
"I can see where he is coming from.
Go to the Bible in the Old Testament, King David, Solomon, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, etc.
There are 100's of examples what the big picture is."

I'm sure you do know where Bush is coming from as you have exactly the same arrogant holier than thou - "we stand on the high ground" attitude that most of the planet detests. It's exactly that attitude that feeds the fires of terrorism, "war of civilization" and disgust at American "values".
Even Tony Blair is finally backing off his buddy demanding that the UN be in the governance of Iraq. Maybe he just realized what kind of destructive force he got in bed with  
Too bad 1,000s of gophers don't have anyone protesting THEIR destruction each summer... for someone who claims to have risked death by bullet there is little evidence of humility or value for life.
The reincarnation types would be wishing you a return as gopher...on that self same ranch.


----------



## SWORD (Mar 26, 2003)

Read Revelations...........
At least I have ground to stand on.
With all the fuses that are being lit in this region,
you may want to take note.
Is this the beginning of the BIG ONE?
If Russia and China get into it as the prophecies were stated 2000 years ago....its all downhill from here.....
War is a scary thing, I hope you will not get a taste of it.........most men **** their pants before they jump in battle. 
Mock all you like, where you are safe, where your opinions and mine account for nothing really.....I have lived on your side of the fence, you assume you can pigeon hole me into your narrow little definition of where I am coming from, something like a pack of fleas all trying to define the elephant they live on. They only see from there perspective,
I have travelled all over the elephant, it was fun, dangerous, exciting and quite an adventure.
I have eaten crow, humble pie, built and lost fortunes.....so I guess I don't know **** from shine.
I have suffered humiliating defeat, abuse, tragedy, pain and suffering.......so I don't know ****.
Go live in a Muslim country..............it will cure your 
perceptions.....especially on Saturday, in the town square.


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

But you have been told nicely, to refrain from personal attacks. If you find it that difficult to keep a civil tongue in your head, and insist on degrading others, I will be delighted to dish out some of your own medicine.
e.[/QB][/QUOTE]

I think the target was appropriate, I've seen the personal BS that Marcello hands out. Let them go it's a fair exchange of narrow minded people.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Oh, Christ... just what we need, another advocate of religious superiority. 

If "God" exists, then He / She / It / They have a lot to answer for....

As for the West being the source of all things wonderful and bountious, one must remember that the imperial powers of Europe, and later the juggernaut of Amerika, have visited upon the majority peoples of this earth great suffering and deprivation. From the church-sanctioned massacre of indigenous peoples throughout the Americas, to the forced displacement of islanders from nuclear testing rangers, to the maquiladora sweatshops that pollute the countryside and reward workers with long hours, dangerous working environments and murder whenever one dared utter the word 'unionize'.

America was the overthrower of democracy in Guatemala and Chile, the usurper of the independence of Cuba, and let us not mention its wondrous works in saving Haiti from desperation and despair (ooops...).

God Save Us from Bush and all religious wackos who not only believe they hold the ultimate truth, but try their damnedest to shove it down our throats. There are good reasons for the separation of Church and State, as one can plainly see...

M.


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

Hmm let me see there is some logic here. If God (whoever you conceive him to be ) is all powerful. God also sends you to hell if you don’t follow his rules. 

Okay now it makes sense I get it if you don’t agree with George you go to hell.

So David it all makes sense.


----------



## SWORD (Mar 26, 2003)

Well,
It's like sticking a broom handle into a hive of bee's..............now I know what you are made of, and where your heads are at...same as the last time I checked the atmosphere.
The temperature and temperment has not been altered, this generation is exactly like the one I survived. Same attitude, different year, different clothing styles only, maybe a nipple ring here and there, some tatoos you will regrett in a few years, we are back in the 70's accept worse off.
I have a great deal of work to do, and so little time.
I'll go out in the fresh air and sun, eat steak, drink beer, shoot gophers, and continue to enjoy life.
.........because I can.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

'Kay, bye then.

Anyone here got any idea how to prevent nipple rings from tarnishing? Being a gopher, I've got 8 of them (jingle, jangle).


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SWORD:
*Read Revelations...........
.so I guess I don't know **** from shine.
I have suffered humiliating defeat, abuse, tragedy, pain and suffering.......so I don't know ****.
Go live in a Muslim country..............it will cure your 
perceptions.....especially on Saturday, in the town square.*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Saturday? Oh, I've been to Muslim countries, and I think think you have the day wrong.

Revelations is an interesting read, but so is Ode to a Grecian Urn. Smoking opium can lead to interesting dreams.

I for one, am NOT hoping for the 4 horsemen to come into town with Bush and the Boys, although some have suggested that that is exactly what Rummy is hoping for. It seems that he is too extreme for most of the chuches in Washinton, and has taken to having staff hold prayer meetings before work, singing hyms that he has written.

Dogma and faith. Not good things to be adding to diplomacy, or military actions.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Re: Arrogance for Dummies.

"We're fighting an enemy that knows no rules of law, that will wear civilian uniforms, 
that is willing to kill 
in order to continue the reign of fear 
of Saddam Hussein." 
G.W.Bush, at the pentagon, March 24, 2003.

Considering that Israel "won" the war of '67 in a week, Bush's arrogance may not serve his own nation very well as the new Commander-in-Chief of a Muslim nation surrounded by Muslim nations. He's got a few more (25 million) Iraqi's to control over time than Sharon has Palestinians.

Did that week in '67 bring peace, love, freedom and happiness?

I hope the US Marines can organize the "Old Testament for Muslims" prayer meetings and bring HIM to the heathens quickly enough to avoid civilian hostility.

THIS IS TOUGH. Only the"willing" need apply. The "unwilling" should really stand back for all this.

Under US military occupation, Christianity as advertised in the New Testament will not be an option as it might suggest non violence as a solution to conflict.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

*Bush just said on TV
"America is God's gift to the world.........

doesn't that just lay it all out for Empire ..anyone that had any illusions about megalomania on Bush's part should reconsider.......the arrogance is unbelievabl*

Look's like Macdoc has been taking a page from Michael Moore. Distorting the truth to make a point.  

That's not what Bush said. He said:

"Iraqis are a good and gifted people. They deserve better than a life spent bowing before a dictator. The people of Iraq deserve to stand on their feet as free men and women -- the citizens of a free country. (Applause.) 

This goal of a free and peaceful Iraq unites our coalition. And this goal comes from the deepest convictions of America. The freedom you defend is the right of every person and the future of every nation. *The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world; it is God's gift to humanity. *"

I'm really saddened to see so many people on ehMac who are so bigoted towards a certain belief. Here's an idea...If you have never actually read the Bible and have no understanding of Christianity... don't comment on it. You just make yourself sound just as arrogant as religious zealots. If you base your knowledge on Christianity with TV evangelists or Crusades that happened in the middle ages, then you probably base your opinion about Islam on the actions of Osama Bin Laden.  

And SWORD... please don't think you can talk so condescending to people and win any friends. 

And people, please watch the language.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

ehMax your quote here may be correct for that speech today but the quote on Jan 30th 2003 was also correct and in essence they are the same. The book I'm reading "Bush at War confirms his view as the "appointed by god" leader of the west.
Bush is playing right into Muslim extremist hands as Bush is setting it up as good versus evil - Bin Laden views Bush as the new Crusader.
Don't try to hide behind - "well you haven't really read or understood the bible or Christianity."
Sorry wrong.. I came from fundamentalist background with church 3 times a week and bible school every summer. My degree includes comparative religions as a part of Eastern philosophy and I have read and discussed Kant and Hegel and Neitsche and Teilhard de Chardan and Francis Bacon and Bertrand Russell and Whitehead.......and and 
Christianity has a proselytising and bloody history, a history of intolerance, fragmenting sects and horrible cruelties all in the name of......
Perhaps understanding how another religion, Judaism in particular, differs yet is incredibly strong keeping an oppressed and dispersed people together for two thousand years you'll see the difference.
Are you hearing Bush, are you hearing Sword?. ...do you understand the arrogance and danger inherent in their mindset?.....this is what so much of the world fears.......take a real hard look at the tenets of your beliefs - you may not like what you see when held up against gentler or wiser ways....some like the Vedas with much longer histories of guiding human behaviour and thought.


----------



## VertiGoGo (Aug 21, 2001)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Your speech can create a vile atmosphere that drives people away or one which is open and valuable discourse. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then stick a cork in your pie-hole until you can play nice, please. For someone with only 3 posts to their credit, you sure do know how to stir the pot. 

This place is about discourse, not grand standing.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

I know your opinion Macdoc. And I agree to disagree. You hear what you want to hear. You misquoted Bush and you just misquoted me in your last post.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Vertigogo, arrogance,distain and sanctimony seems to go with the mindset  
IF you are divinely informed and enlightened then there is no room for alternative views or diverse opinion or lifestyles.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

ehMax, thanks for the pointer to the speech and the correction (I wonder if George W. stumbled when reading?). The speech is interesting in its deliberate spelling out of the international coalition:

"The Australian military is providing naval gunfire support, and Special Forces, and fighter aircraft on missions deep in Iraq. Polish military forces have secured an Iraqi oil platform in the Persian Gulf. A Danish submarine is monitoring Iraqi intelligence providing early warning. Czech, Slovak, Polish, and Romanian forces, soon to be joined by Ukrainian and Bulgarian forces, are forward deployed in the region, prepared to respond in the event of an attack of weapons of mass destruction anywhere in the region. Spain is providing important logistical and humanitarian support."

I'm surprised he didn't add that the Columbians are supplying some ultra pure coke, the Eritreans some unused UN food rations and the Latvians some clog dancers.

He is clearly sensitive to the charge that the US is acting without world support. But is he deluding himself? Over 90% of the forces, armament, command, etc are US. Most of the rest are British. Who is Bush trying to impress? The US people, presumably. I don't think they are so gullible.

The second point is that this thread revealed the massive conflicts between religeous and secular viewpoints. Religeon and war do not mix well and our government structures keep them apart for good reason. How can we question the stoning to death of a rape victim in Nigeria if we invoke divine rights in justifying war? That doesn't mean we should question a persons religeous beliefs- its a free country. But they should simply not be used as a codification of a position because how can one rationally argue with what one person believes his/her God interprets? They believe what they believe.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"If you have never actually read the Bible and have no understanding of Christianity..."
How is that a misquote - it was lifted exactly from your post just as above.

I admit the misquote for today' s speech but he said it before and continues to invoke it at every opportunity.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/iraq/ny-livit163133081feb16,0,3520570.column?coll=ny-top-headlines 

Have a good look at that article.
Realize it's Bush's approach I and many others are disgusted with. I have no problem with Jimmy Carter's approach and both are fundamentalists.
I was pleased Apple chose to honour Carter's work for world peace with a special edition Think Different poster.

Thisis a very accurate summary of the issue for both America and the world.

"It is a paradox of America, but when the founders established religious freedom they also established the right of citizens to secular government. They didn't want a president who was head of a church, the way the king of England was. They didn't want a president who was preacher-in-chief.
"There is a distinction between America's civil religion and the language that President Bush uses, which comes from a specific evangelical Christian viewpoint," said the Rev. C. Welton Gaddy, a Monroe, La., theologian and president of the Interfaith Alliance, a Washington-based group that advocates religious tolerance. "When [Bush] speaks in these terms, he leaves out whole segments of America ... His language implies a lack of appreciation for the vastness of religious pluralism in this land."
Gaddy spoke by phone last week to a group of newspaper reporters linked in a conference call. He was joined by Elaine Pagels, a Princeton University professor of religion.
Gaddy and Pagels said they wanted to express their concerns about the way the president has infused his every program - but especially his call for war on Iraq - with religious language.
"The president reminds me of a first-year seminary student," Gaddy said. The first-year seminarian has great faith, and great energy, but "has not yet learned the key virtue, which is humility," he said.
In the absence of this virtue, Pagels said, Bush has framed the conflict with Iraq as "God's people versus Satan's people ."

ehMax that's an American Christian leader saying exactly the same thing I'm so concerned about
Bush is polarizing the world in a very dangerous manner.
I trust Colin Powell, he is not comfortable with Bush....that makes me very very nervous. http://www.drudgereport.com/wood.htm 

"One of Powell’s greatest difficulties was that he was more or less supposed to pretend in public that the sharp differences in the war cabinet did not exist. The president would not tolerate public discord. Powell was also held in check by his own code – a soldier obeys.
Bush might order, Go get the guns! Get my horses! – all the Texas, Alamo macho that made Powell uncomfortable. But he believed and hoped that the president knew better, that he would see the go-it-alone approach did not stand further analysis. Hopefully, the Afghan war had provided the template for that understanding"

Obviously it didn't and Bush is now reaping the harvest of his "go it alone" attitude.
and of course then there's Cheney

"Cheney was beyond hell-bent for action against Saddam. It was as if nothing else existed."









ehMax, even the founding fathers of the US - in a much more religious age, recognized the dangers in mixing religion and government and the abuse that could and did arise.
Only 9% of US blacks voted for Bush.







Do you think maybe they understood the danger he represents??


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter I think you better re-read Sword's posts, polite an respectful..I don't think so and it got to more than just me.
Do you think Bush and Jimmy Carter are on the same page of Christian virtue?? You are defending without looking at the content.

used to be - why is it inappropriate to discuss Bush's framing this conflict in religious terms and how dangerous that is.

Andy it's Bush's approach.... yes he's the conduit for his advisors Pax Americana plan ( not Powell's plan) but it's Bush himself setting out the religious war tone.
Did you read the article from Newsday?? Even moderate supportive Christians are questioning his approach.

Whether the support is there or not in the US is irrelevant. Bush HIMSELF is laying out this conflict in terms that give Bin Laden's "clash of civilization" and Crusades imagery validity in the eyes of those that may be inclined to resist Pax Americana with terrorism.
I don't find Blair presenting this kind of danger. He is doing an admirable job of holding the UN's toes to the fire to get moving yet insisting the UN play THE major role in post war governance.
Is it so hard to see the difference to the world between Blair's approach and Bush's??
How the US is perceived by the rest of the world will to a large extent predicate the degree of peace for the world for the next decade.

This is a long article from The New York Times but it's not directly accessible and it speaks to my concerns perfectly and worth the read.

Repairing the World
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Some days, you pick up the newspaper and you don't know whether to laugh or cry. Let's see, the prime minister of Serbia just got shot, and if that doesn't seem like a bad omen then you missed the class on World War I. Our strongest ally for war in Iraq is Bulgaria — a country I've always had a soft spot for, because it protected its Jews during World War II, but a country that's been on the losing side of every war in the last 100 years. Congress is renaming French fries "freedom fries." George Bush has managed to lose a global popularity contest to Saddam Hussein, and he's looking to build diplomatic support in Europe by flying to the Azores, a remote archipelago in the Atlantic, to persuade the persuaded leaders of Britain and Spain to stand firm with him. I guess the North Pole wasn't available. I've been to the Azores. It was with Secretary of State James Baker on, as I recall, one of his seven trips around the world to build support for Gulf War I. Mr. Baker used the Azores to refuel.

Having said all that, I am glad Mr. Bush is meeting with Tony Blair. In fact, I wish he would turn over leadership on the whole Iraq crisis to him. Mr. Blair has an international vision that Mr. Bush sorely needs. "President Bush should be in charge of marshaling the power for this war," says the Middle East expert Stephen P. Cohen, "and Tony Blair should be in charge of the vision for which that power should be applied."

Why? What does Tony Blair get that George Bush doesn't? The only way I can explain it is by a concept from the Kabbalah called "tikkun olam." It means, "to repair the world." If you listened to Tony Blair's speeches in recent weeks they contain something so strikingly absent from Mr. Bush's. Tony Blair constantly puts the struggle for a better Iraq within a broader context of moral concerns. Tony Blair always leaves you with the impression that for him the Iraq war is just one hammer and one nail in an effort to do tikkun olam, to repair the world.

Did you see Mr. Blair's recent speech about the environment? He called for a new "international consensus to protect our environment and combat the devastating impacts of climate change." "Kyoto is not radical enough," he said. "Ultimately this is about our world as a global community. . . . What we lack at present is a common agenda that is broad and just. . . . That is the real task of statesmanship today."

Did you hear Mr. Blair talk Friday about the Middle East conflict? "We are right to focus on Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction," he said, "but we must put equal focus on the plight of the people whose lives are being devastated by lack of progress in the peace process. Israeli civilians and Palestinians."

Contrast that with Mr. Bush. His White House declaration about resuming the peace process was delivered with all the enthusiasm of someone about to have his teeth drilled. On the environment, the president has never appreciated how damaging it was for him to scrap the Kyoto treaty, which was unimplementable, without offering an alternative. Nothing has hurt America's image more than the impression Mr. Bush has left that when it comes to terrorism — our war — there must be a universal crusade, but on the environment — the universal concern of others — we'll do whatever we want.

Yes, some people and nations are just jealous of America's power and that's why they oppose us on Iraq. But there is something more to the opposition. I deeply identify with the president's vision of ending Saddam Hussein's tyranny and building a more decent, progressive Iraq. If done right, it could be so important to the future of the Arab-Muslim world, which is why I won't give up on this war. But can this Bush team be counted on to do it right? Mr. Bush's greatest weakness is that too many people, at home and abroad, smell that he's not really interested in repairing the world. Everything is about the war on terrorism.

Lord knows, I don't diminish the threats we face, but for 18 months all we've been doing is exporting our fears to the world. Virtually all of Mr. Bush's speeches are about how we're going to protect ourselves and whom we're going to hit next. America as a beacon of optimism — America as the world's chief carpenter, not just cop — is gone. We need a little less John Wayne and a little more J.F.K. Once we get this Iraq crisis behind us, we need to get back to exporting our hopes, not just our fears.  

THREATS AND RESPONSES: NEWS ANALYSIS; A Reminder Of a Mission


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Politics and Religion in the same thread... a nasty mix. Apologies if I was over the top earlier, I usually try to be more considerate of those who, as children, were drop-- ...er, I mean, those who hold views that do not coincide with my own.

i promise to try very hard to wait at least 30 minutes before replying to anything that raises my blood pressure... 

M


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Politics and Religion in the same thread..a nasty mix.?..now if we could just get Bush to understand that.









Part of what really gets to me is the role that the US played in arming Saddam and how they looked the other way when Iran was the "enemy" of the hour and Saddam was busy gassing Kurds with chemicals the US "dual use" equipment sales allowed them to make and the sales of US helicopters allowed him to deliver


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

ehMax
Mr.Mayor, (respectfully)

According to your criteria I certainly qualify to expose in my way to others the religious hypocrisy of those who assume the right or proclaim that there exists a right to execute any person who gets in the way exploding ordnance set off by any state or person free or not. http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/mdc_team_5.html 

It is the hypocrisy and not the religion that needs exposure. Some of those who I think use religion as a ruse I admit to admonishing with good natured ridicule.

"The liberty we prize is not American's (sic) gift to the world; it is God's gift to humanity." 
GWB 3/26/03

There is not a whiff or even pretense of altruism or sincerity in the above given the circumstances.

That the above was spoken to an unquestioningly obedient group paid to kill people in commanding that a supreme universal power legitimizes the work of an impending mass killing, collateral or not.

Bush's invocation of the name of "GOD" is to an audience who must on his orders as commander-in-chief kill people without question.

The President of the United States has formally invoked the name of a "god" of HIS OWN understanding .... as opposed to ALL OTHER understanding that a "gift to humanity" be delivered by lethal force.

I do not believe my little "rantlette" here to be a stretch.
It is deadly simple.

Macdoc's outrage has produced a lively exchange and his very emphatic intro to me does not distort what so many understand to be an utter perversion of the US's constitutional doctrine of church/state separation. That this perversion is a Bushism is not to my knowledge even debated. Its working for the hawks.

Bush's "gift to the world" was expressed more broadly and more in line with the "Project for the New American Century" at the Pentagon on the 24th :
"Of course, we have troops standing watch in other parts of the world to protect and maintain the peace. All the members of the military, abroad, at home or here in this important building, are bound together by a great cause: to defend the American people and advance the universal hope of freedom. May God continue to look out after those who defend the peace and freedom. And may God continue to bless America. "

If only Bush & Co. and all those with the weapons would just kill each other and leave the rest of us in peace .... eh?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macello it's almost as if Bush is unaware that his words carry beyond the audience he addressed.
I found the commentary earlier about avoiding religious invocation at the UN quite enlightening - that shows respect and tolerance of diversity.
I guess the most disturbing part is that if this is the public face of the US regime how much worse is it behind closed doors.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

*ehMax, even the founding fathers of the US - in a much more religious age, recognized the dangers in mixing religion and government and the abuse that could and did arise.
*

And I totally agree! I'm not pro-Bush by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## VertiGoGo (Aug 21, 2001)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Bush has a whack of people like Colin Powell around....to lay your blame or praise on one guy is just plain ignorant and shows a lack of understanding of the democratic system. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bush is Commander-in-Chief of the US military. NOTHING happens militarily anywhere in the world unless Bush gives the green light. To suggest otherwise "shows a lack of understanding of the (US) democratic system."


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote:: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>* Peter I think you better re-read Sword's posts, polite an respectful..I don't think so and it got to more than just me. *<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I did read the posts a second time before throwing down the yellow flag. Rhodes seemed slightly condescending, but polite with the presentation. SWORD had a harsher attitude, but after Britnell and macello became insolent and you threw a log on the fire, I couldn't blame him/her. I suspect many here would literally slam the door in the face of a Jehova's Witness. I don't think that's a polite thing to do either. Sometimes I don't answer the door, sometimes I may tell them that I'm too busy to talk, and sometimes I discuss issues with them and we challenge each other in a very friendly manner. We part with a handshake, even though we have disagreed. I never insult them and we get along well.
Call me naive or old-fashioned, but I'd rather spend my time exchanging thoughts and opinion with someone who respects mine (be it right or wrong in his eyes) than with someone who probably _is_ right but finds it nescessary to insults my intelligence or beliefs while disagreeing with me.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*Do you think Bush and Jimmy Carter are on the same page of Christian virtue?? You are defending without looking at the content.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't recall entering a point of view on this, neither was I defending anyone's point of view. I was defending their right to be challenged in a respectful manner. Do we tell our children that they are stupid and wrong, or do we open their minds or see the broader picture? We're not dealing with children here, but the principle holds for everyone. These are supposed to be discussions, open to freedom of expression (within reason), not suppression.

That's my two cents worth for the day, folks. Hope everyone has a good one.  
Good morning, Dr G, wherever you are.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

macdoc said: "why is it inappropriate to discuss Bush's framing this conflict in religious terms and how dangerous that is".

It's not inappropriate. But it got off on the wrong foot and quickly descended into a secular vs religeous exchange of barbs. Mixing religeon with politics yields a fuel that ignites spontaneously. All sides call upon their God to protect them. I find it the ultimate in hypocrisy to invoke "evil" actions in the name of combatting "evil".

Bush has come to the end of his line of half-thought out reasons for justifying this war. He is revealing his bias and motivation in what he says and does. It's also evident in other legislative changes he's enacted (such as allowing religeous organizations to run state funded programs). Many (most?) of our leaders have strong religeous convictions. No problem there, until it is used to justify actions of one nation against another.


----------



## rhino (Jul 10, 2002)

Peter Scharman wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I was defending their right to be challenged in a respectful manner. Do we tell our children that they are stupid and wrong, or do we open their minds or see the broader picture? We're not dealing with children here, but the principle holds for everyone. These are supposed to be discussions, open to freedom of expression (within reason), not suppression. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is this spirit and framework with which I chose to participate in the grand ehMac Forum. I have learned much and continue to do so. About debating; exchange of ideas in many forms and styles; differing points of view. Is this not an underlying tenure of freedom of speech and democracy? Ranting has it's place if placed in proper context. Frustration for example.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Peter Scharman

Hypocrisy exposed breeds righteous protest, insolence and even disrespect as millions worldwide on their feet (and in strollers) can attest.
This is how the "hippie" war on the Vietnam war was won.
Do you remember? ** when Pearson had the temerity to suggest that the United States interrupt its bombing of North Vietnam, an angry U.S. President Lyndon Johnson upbraided him furiously, grabbing him by his lapels and castigating him for "pissing on my rug."

Trudeau, not suffering fools (Nixon) gladly, was accused of insolence and disrespect for refusing to send US draft escapees into carnage.

Hypocrisy breeds lies from behind a pious mask.

As to our privileged children, let's try to be more concerned about the ones in the path of the largest and most lethal force of human violence ever known on this planet.

**http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...sts&call_pageid=970599109774&call_pagepath=Co lumnists


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"but I'd rather spend my time exchanging thoughts and opinion with someone who respects mine"

Yes Peter that is exactly the point and exactly why there was a reaction to the pontification and condescending attitude of Rhodes/Sword and not just from me.
Each post simply reinforced the notion that he had "the keys to the kingdom" and no other view had merit. 

"Go to the Bible in the Old Testament, King David, Solomon, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, etc.
There are 100's of examples what the big picture is.
I can understand why you would balk at this statement......You fellows don't believe in absolute truth, you have been taught truth is a floating point. If there is no God, then truth is different for ever person according to their circumstances......its relative.
If truth is relative than you have opened the door to every social infection known to man.'

This is a statement not an argument. and it is exceedingly arrogant and condescending.

This is EXACTLY where Bush is causing so much antagonism world wide.


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

This post has got in to the area of ignorance which kind of amuses me. 

You lot discuss Bush like he was a dictator not a the leader of a democratically elected government.

Now before anyone starts this “Andy is a Bush lover”…don’t bother I’m indifferent about the man, he is after all in a class of his own …A POLITICIAN.


David you may have discussed Kant and Hegel and Neitsche and Teilhard de Chardan and Francis Bacon and Bertrand Russell and Whitehead.......and… maybe just maybe you should read something on the American political system. I know it’s easier to misquote and blame one person but that just ain’t the way the system runs.

Bush has a whack of people like Colin Powell around him making decisions and advising him.. C’mon guys we all know this stuff. 

To lay your blame or praise on one guy is just plain ignorant and shows a lack of understanding of the democratic system. 

Let me suggest to all of you that the Bush Administration is the controlling power here, though Congress and the Senate are behind the war . 

Last time I checked the government was supposed to represent the people, and according to the latest survey the majority of the US citizens support the war in Iraq.

So perhaps heap the arrows or bouquets on the American people, because from where I sit, like it or not the Bush administration seems to be doing what it was elected to do represent the people.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

I'm reminded why I don't follow or get too involved with the "dicy" topics any more. Exercise an opinion or belief and get ready to be pounced on and abused by the other camp of self-proclaimed sages. Rhodes and SWORD may not hold the popular view , but they stated what they felt in a polite and respectful manner. I consider some of the responses, particularly on the first page of this thread, to be innapropriate and rude. Not a nice way to treat others, like their opinions or not.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Peter, 

Rhodes and SWORD appear to be one and the same (check the profiles). I agree that the tenor of the thread is hostile and since ehMax corrected the original misquote (which macdoc did state in the title - did I hear him right...??) maybe its time to close this wound before it gets any deeper? If only it were so easy to close the wound that is Iraq.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Rhodes and SWORD appear to be one and the same (check the profiles). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Interesting. The e-mails are the same last name but different initials, so maybe members of the same family (same belief and sticking together?). Nonetheless, my observation still stands.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

A gentle reminder:

Bush is or was not in a class of his own or any other.
He skipped class.
Failed Law.
Failed MBA
until daddy (on the school board) bought him the MBA. 

It's called Bush League.

Now he has a new toy.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Yes Peter that is exactly the point and exactly why there was a reaction to the pontification and condescending attitude of Rhodes/Sword and not just from me.
Each post simply reinforced the notion that he had "the keys to the kingdom" and no other view had merit. * <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess we react differently to points of view and presentation. That's OK, but in this case, his presentation didn't boither me, although the content might be open to different opinions. I think you might have read (or been looking for) a much stronger tone in his message than was intended and possibly over-reacted. I obviously didn't see it the way some did.
The opposing reactions are what bothers me. They're every bit as intollerant and arogant as they charge, so where's the better example and who is supposed to be credible. It also kills the spirit of debate. It's true that more than one person reacted angrily to Rhodes/SWORD's comments,but don't ignore that mine was not the only post chastising the attack on free opinion. The door swings both ways. 
I didn't intend this to become a separate debate, but as an often third party observer (and learner) in many threads, I really get turned off when intelligent people turn a thread ugly because of intollerance of what is perceived as an indefensible point of view. Ideologies are not always accurately read from quickly typed thoughts and often assumptions (remember that word?) are made by the reader without first getting further clarification of the details. We are faceless contributors...we don't know each other's true personalities, qualities or contribution to society. Who can never say that what was read was not what they meant. Emotion and intent can easily be misread, so lets not label people until we get to know them better. I'm sure that some of the members I find at times really annoying are actually really nice people in person and I've read them the wrong way. The pen shouldn't become a sword so quickly IMHO. Those who don't agree won't really care anyway, I supose. In other words, let's play nice and share the sandbox. If a player is out of bounds, correct him if you will, but please don't be abusive bullies. A friend of mine used to like using this line on me....."Don't be bitter, Peter. Nobody likes a bitter peter"


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Well said, Peter. How we perceive things is based upon our "schemata", which is from our background of knowledge and experiences. To change one's perception, we would need to provide new knowledge and experiences, which a person would then have to "assimilate and accommodate" (to quote Piaget). Change would have to come from within and it is not an easy task to teach, or even force upon a person. This is where the posts that are most meaningful, at least for me, are those that present a perspective in a logical manner, without resorting to personal negatives expressed towards others in the fourum.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Thanks, Dr G. I'm glad to have some support. I hate sticking my toes in these waters for fear of the sharks.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, I thought that experiencing the "running of the doxies in Pamploma" would have prepared you for this sort of attack and vindication. Actually, I too have avoided certain threads, in that I do have an opinion, but I don't want to openly debate others on certain issues. They are free to think and write as they so choose, but I choose not to interactively participate in their debate.

How is Life treating you, my friend???


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Peter and Dr. G, come on in, the water is warm. In fact there's even some bubbles rising over there. Anyway, as I was sa..........


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by used to be jwoodget:
*Peter and Dr. G, come on in, the water is warm. In fact there's even some bubbles rising over there. Anyway, as I was sa..........*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

mmmmmm

toes


tasty


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

snick snack


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Sure,... tempt me!! Let me think about this for a bit...NO!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

The Icon Maven has returned!!!

jwoodget, do you know that doxies swim like otters (although not as fast) and attack toes just like alligators????? It's a Canadian Fact.

This Canadian Fact was brought to you by Information Canada, a section of Education Canada, which is a subsection of the Ministty of Knowledge.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Ministty* of Knowledge. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
needs to buy a spell checker.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I feel like I'm walking in the aftermath of a verbal war. Everyone has had their mental landscape bombarded and yet nothing has changed. Perhaps there's lesson to be learned from this.  

As for the religious beliefs from earlier, this sort of the thread is the exact reason why I keep my personal and spiritual beliefs to myself and only elaborate under the appropriate circumstances. Otherwise, you're in danger of sounding like you're preaching or recruiting for a cult. Yes I'm speaking to you Sword. I respect your opinions but your early posts in this thread came across as fragmented tirades. Logic flew out the window; however, I do understand why you were provoked. Please just don't make your own assumptions about age dictating wisdom and then drop random references to the Bible. I've read it and nothing irritates me more than those who use it as an easy references when it's always more complex than presented. If you'd actually like to discuss Biblical texts then start a discussion or a new thread.

If we can't discuss these matters rationally while respecting each other, then we might as well take out our anger and frustrations by killing each other in UT instead.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter - you want to see what I and others reacted to .....here it is in its full blown glory

Proudly proclaimed by Mr. Rhodes
"I have devoured many monkeys....but they are a bit tough.
Eye to eye is more valuable, tongues seem to wag with more respect. As I would not engage 
and infant in quality discussion of this nature, I was a little disappointed but not shocked a the level many of you operate at. It has been many years since I went to University, my sword is a little dull. The relativism I was observing in the 70's has taken full root.
You can remove me from your list.
I prefer to speak face to face. Looking someone in the eye, with intonation and body language as I find it is much more valuable. I will tend my own lifes garden....which is rich and full of joy & meaning, serving my community.

FORUM's where you can hold someone accountable to what they say is of more interest.
The sound of screaming children and soiled diapers......well I have been there ....done that.
Was expecting more, but smelt alot of soiled diapers on this FORUM.
Many here were articulate and handled themselves quite well, but others..........need some discipline. I used to love teaching guys with mouths like this hand to hand combat....use your imagination...........
Hiding behind a computer screen does not give us license to disrespect any human being. I apologize if my direct manner caused anyone to do the funky chicken.......although it was fun to watch.........shame on me.
We do however judge each other very un-fairly from behind these computer screens. Everyone brings their bias and pre-conceived ideas to the table....becoming judge jury and executioner.
Shame on all of us..............I have real battles to fight and so do you. Those in my neighborhood......my best friends son hooked on crack, another five men out of work for the last 12 months, single mom's needing help to buy food, trying to raise their kids , another couple who lost their son in a head on collision.........these are real battles.
Those voices call louder............ "

as I said in that thread...good riddance   

You may have missed Mr. Rhodes humble contribution to "What do people do for a living.." thread
The mind set evinced is a tad different from the rest of those that posted.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Consider the topic please.

I get the impression that some here got off the plane in Baghdad thinking its Red Deer and wonder what happened to Tim Horton's.

This topic might not be suitable for those who want to tie religious, spiritual or ethical proclivities in with the fact of carnage and dead folk on the ground be they men, women, children, Iraqi, American or if the Alliance had it's way, Canadian.

The topic starter expresses outrage over George Bush's invocation of a "GOD" (presumably looking favorably upon American interests) to order the largest and most lethal force of human violence ever known on this planet.

This is really death dealing brutality ! 
So please don't get all sensitive and stuff.

The kid on the ground doesn't even know of the B-52 40,000 feet above looking for mommy or whatever. The ascoted bomber pilot coming non-stop and return from England doesn't give a **** where the **** lands with this amphetamines wearing off. 

So these plaintive objections are way out of context. 
Where outrage is the topic, don't come in with a fragile constitution or an easily bruised ego.

Please check out some of the three hundred or so topics on this most generous forum. You may find as much to enhance the mental landscape and provide comic relief as I do.

Start a new topic on religious or spiritual matters and you will find excellent company here.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Peter - you want to see what I and others reacted to .....here it is in its full blown glory* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wonder who pushed the buttons to make him react so strongly to other's reactions to him?  
An escalating reaction to a reaction to a reaction.......a seed turned into a beanstalk....... I get the feeling you don't like him







Did anyone find Rhode's headspace kind of intriguing?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Dr. G said
"Actually, I too have avoided certain threads, in that I do have an opinion, but I don't want to openly debate others on certain issues. They are free to think and write as they so choose, but I choose not to interactively participate in their debate."

I'll dodge a thread or two if I'm not in the mood or don't feel I have much to contribute. But Dr. G you are damn hard to coax into participation in controversial topics.
Your background and education means that you have a lot to offer.....if you choose to.
I admire ehMax for putting himself into a vulnerable position even when he might feel uncomfortable.
Even Peter will venture into "dangerous waters" from time to time.
It's only when the full spectrum of opinions and contributions are in play that magic can happen.
Heated and passionate arguments can be fun and informative and get your blood up all without being negative.
A number of times I've had to completely rework my assumptions after hearing a diverse opinion.
But it's only by be engaging and challenging and being heartfelt that the threads can generate "new knowledge and experiences, which a person would then have to "assimilate and accommodate".

Look at the risk Vertigogo took in opening up the Gay Marriage thread and ehMax participating in abortion and shall we say "challenging to his world view" discussions.

The Kitchen only thrives and stays interesting when there is active participation. Sure there will be a few sparks and smoke when the stove gets particularly hot. This is the area where your shirt tail can hang out and you don't have to be quite as circumspect as you do int the workday world.
MacNutt and CubaMark are exxcellent bookends to the political spectrum. Vocal, opinionated and with a good dose of humour.
But they do take the time to argue their cases.
We need YOUR opinion, YOUR experiences, you too Peter, without worrying about your toes.








That goes for all the lurkers...participate.  
You may be challenged, you'll often be applauded but you'll always be appreciated.
Sure you might take some ribbing - hey Leaf fans get on Canadiens case all the time.
Hearing and interchanging diverse opinion and ideas is good practice for dealing with a polarizing and fractured world.
Engage........


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I get the impression that Rhodes is somewhat troubled and may just need an outlet.

Demonstrated by the Rhodes/SWORD dichotomy, perhaps it best that we ask him/her to continue to post and see where the path takes us.

The mayor will in his infinite wisdom decide when enough is enough and will edit accordingly.

I, for one, am not afraid of a little walk along the unlit (sorry, i refuse to say 'unlighted') path. It's good for the soul to conduct such a mental "walkabout" once in a while.

Just my $0.02.

No pop psychology books were harmed in the creation of this post.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macello would mind explaining to Peter why you also reacted so strongly to Rhodes.TIA

For my part Rhodes presented the same scary combination of piousness and threats that Bush cloaks himself in.....ironically the exact topic of the thread.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Welll....gone for a day and a half on business and I come back to find that I have missed a smokin good thread!







 

I came in late...and now all the fun's over. Rats!

And I want to refute, before any accusations start flying around here, that I am either SWORD or Darrell Rhodes. Not a chance. 

But I think both had some valid points...and I particularly liked Darrell's style.

I have a strong feeling that he's been to some of the far-flung places that I've been. That he's seen things that no-one is ever supposed to see...and come away a changed person. A person committed to stopping at least some of this horror that he has seen with his own eyes, by whatever means possible. 

On this point, I am with him 100%.

Because I've seen it too. More than once. Up close and personal.

There is no possible way any thinking, feeling human being can see this sort of thing and come away unchanged. Believe me.

To feel bullets pass by your head, to hear the zing and _know_...in that instant of purest clarity...that you almost died.

Right that very moment.

And to know, also in purest clarity, that those same bullets were fired by someone who may not have been aiming at you (who didn't even care who you were), and that these little hornets of death may have found their mark in some other poor soul who hadn't done anything wrong except to BE there at that precise moment in time.

(you think about this later...often over and over, in the wee hours of many mornings after many sleepless nights.
That all comes much later. At the time it actually happens, you just want to get behind any large solid object and become invisible.You just want to LIVE another day. Just one more day..please God...just one more day)

And to KNOW that all this terror and hurt happens because some despotic sub-human, or small group of same, was trying to prevent an impending loss of power and influence. Or...even worse...wants to extend their illegitimate power to some new area. Often (almost always) this area is occupied by people who would not make war on anyone. For any reason.

When you think about all of this later (and you _will_ think about it a lot) then you get the shakes. Real bad.

First you get really scared....then you get really _MAD_!

And then you want to _change_ things. You know, down deep, that you _have_ to do _something_ to change things. To keep this sort of inhuman nonsense from ever happening to any human...ever...anywhere!

And, yes...it sometimes takes some sort of military action to do it. 

Fair enough.

Get it done, get it over with, and FIX the problem. Take out the despot who is ordering this ongoing carnage and terror and give the people who have been suffering an even chance to determine their own destiny. Let THEM decide for themselves, if they would like to fight, or if they would like to have a peaceful life.

Because they have no choice, whatsoever, right now. That's for SURE. Give them a chance to choose for themselves.

And, you know what? You might just end up with a peaceful, prosperous Nation....where once existed a threat to everyone. It's certainly happened before. Just give them the chance to decide for themselves.


One last thing:

Darrell Rhodes and/or SWORD has obviously been in some sort of combat situation. A wise man once said "there are NO atheists in a foxhole. EVERYONE becomes a believer". 

Boy _HOWDY_!

Before any of you rage against him, for believing in a Higher Power, on some sort of philisophical grounds, please try to understand. Stop...take a breath, and consider. 

Take a walk in his shoes. See what he has seen...

You may end up becoming a believer, as well. 

I have...and I am.

Cut him a bit of slack. If he's been where I think he's been, and seen what I think he's seen..then he needs all of you to understand where he's coming from, in all of this

And I need everyone of you to understand where I have been coming from, in all of this.

It's not from some slavish dedication to any particular ideology. It's not Right or Left.

It comes from real experiences in actual reality.

Honest.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, thank you for the compliment ("But Dr. G you are damn hard to coax into participation in controversial topics. Your background and education means that you have a lot to offer...."). However, at times, the debates become a street fight, and I choose to ignore such verbal brawls. I have tried to calm the waters, so to speak, at various times in various threads. When there is an overt injustice done, or something that I feel I need to comment upon, I do so. Other than that, I leave the back and forth debates to others.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macnutt - it's not HIS beliefs that causing the conflict it's his total distain for differing views and his sense of self importance.
You've been taken to task for belittling language but never on his "Moses from on high" level and complete odius distain for others with a different view of the world.
Read his language, read his attitude ........respect is earned.
You have mine......he hasn't come close.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

macnutt, I don't think anybody here thought you were moonlighting as a high-end tailor!









I also have a better perspective on where you are coming from thanks to your last post. Welcome back.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"moonlighting as a high-end tailor!"  perfect...just perfect
How to express an opinion... pointedly.... in 5 words.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

MACDOC:
posted March 28, 2003 02:12 AM                       
Macello would you mind explaining to Peter why you also reacted so strongly to Rhodes.TIA 

Caution ! This may be offensive to some .... OK? 
It may contain derision, ridicule and a whiff of unintended odious distain blowing over from Darryl's posts.
.... and PLEASE understand that I have extreme prejudice against war and zero esteem for war advocates. If war is your solution, don't just sit there, Get out of the house and start shooting! 
For Darryl, don't forget to: http://www.wesupporttheusa.ca/ [eider.cira.ca]

Registrar: Telligent Corporation 
Subdomain: wesupporttheusa.ca 
Admin-Name: Tammy Schuiling 
Admin-Title: Admin-Postal: 420 7a Street N.E. 
Calgary AB T2E 4G1 Canada 
Admin-Phone: 4032661957 
Admin-Mailbox: [email protected] 
Tech-Name: Domain Master 
Tech-Postal: Suite 275, 3553 - 31 ST NW, 
Calgary AB T2L 2K7 Canada 
Tech-Phone: (403) 313-2032 
Tech-Fax: (403) 503-0416 
Tech-Mailbox: [email protected] 

YES macdoc, gleefully; and with respect for Rhodes' admirable work in helping those in the grip of drug addiction.

Did you (TIA) mean Rhodes' "Transient Ischemic Attack" ?

MACDOC wrote: For my part Rhodes presented the same scary combination of piousness and threats that Bush cloaks himself in.....ironically the exact topic of the thread.

Agreed; as I emphasize in my post of March 28, 2003 01:15 AM 

I get from Darryl Rhodes' holy message a biblical refutation of all democratic principle, never mind Einstein's influential work on relativity.

Darryl Rhodes: "I can see where he (Bush) is coming from."

Perfectly in line with the fervent and absolute religious belief widely held in the US that GWB is chosen by "GOD" to lead the world, that choice assigning democracy to the evil that is relativism.

This earns my favourite flavor of derision; the "Nuke 'em all and let god sort them out" Award courtesy of General Creighton Abrams of "Acres" fame.

Darryl Rhodes: "You fellows don't believe in absolute truth, you have been taught truth is a floating point. If there is no God, then truth is different for ever person according to their circumstances......its relative."

Again, no more ballots please, since democracy happens to be relative, DR gets my faux chocolate flavor of ridicule, the "If ya gets in the path of ordnance ya get with god real quick" award along with the "become a believer! " chant. 

Darryl Rhodes: "If truth is relative than you have opened the door to every social infection known to man." 

That really stung Darryl ! He has defined democracy as social infection. 

Here I trot out the derision-ridicule combo special "Exterminator"award with a "Liberal" dollop of insolence a la mode. 

Yadayada etc. .. "a man eating tribe they went to live with in the jungles."
Here come the Heathens !

More yadayada .. "You need to talk or hear from the recipients(sic)** of what President Bush talked about before you judge so harshly. 

** those that got a little more than a winged brushing of death.

... "bullets pass by your head ... to hear the zing" ... yadayada ... "there are NO * atheists in a foxhole."

Romantic though pathetic Hollywood sentiments. I think the later quote from 'Platoon". We need research here. 
Reagan had this problem when he told of his war experience at the Nazi grave in Germany and rattled off some of his movie lines. He never left Hollywood during that war.

That both Rhodes and macnutt * suggest for the rest of us a brushing of death to bring us around to their valhalla is a most ancient warmonger's ruse.

I strongly suggest that if they are so poetically enamored of the killing fields they go there again and feel that buzz.
After they get back there's the Mosaic "Burning Bush" award (in progress) sans the sixth commandment.

No Peter, I find none of this "intriguing".


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

gotcha oaky...

what's the old saw..."be careful of what you wish for "

well I did indeed ask......









Got under your skin too eh.

BTW I wouldn't lump Macnutt in the same category atho he certainly parked his humvee in the same lot.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Caution ! This may be offensive to some .... OK? 
It may contain derision, ridicule and a whiff of unintended odious distain blowing over from Darryl's posts.
.... and PLEASE understand that I have extreme prejudice against war and zero esteem for war advocates.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And so it goes on, and right back around to my original observation. I don't think you have the right to accuse others of intolerance and distain (macdoc's comment on Rhodes) if you don't practice it yourself. At least macello forewarned us of his impending lashing. As Dr G put it, you fellows like to street fight instead of playing nice. This doesn't pertain to this thread alone...it has been observed before, and it really bugs me. That's why I threw down the flag and decided to put my neck out. I know others share at least some of my sentiments and that's why you don't see as much participation in the more sensitive topics, as was noted by Macdoc a few postings earlier. I guess the best solution is to stay away from any topics that the known members are participating in. As the wise old woman replied when asked how she handled an intense argument, she said, " I turn and look out the window and change the topic". (Interesting that macnutt liked Rhodes' style)


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter you simply don't perceive the total disrespect and arrogance that are contained in Sword's posts.
Macello could have said more initially and so could I.
"Playing nice" doesn't work with certain mindsets as Dr. G will tell you about Chicago cops at a certain Democatic convention.
Look at his language and attitude and tell me our responses ( before I asked Macello) were similar to his posts.
They weren't.
Accommodating diversity is not in this guy's mindset.
Do you remember the post about difference between democratic government and miitary chain of command.??
The former must accommodate differing viewpoints to function, the other WILL NOT tolerate it.
Where do you think danger lies??


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, yes, "Playing nice" does not work effectively with various "mindsets" (e.g., the Chicago police at the 1968 Democatic convention). I can see your frustration, and if I had the time I would get more involved in this verbal debate/fight. Personally, it is not worth the time to argue with a person who is inflexible, be they presenting a point of view that I totally agree or disagree with, if this debate will settle nothing of value. However, place this debate on the floor of the US Senate or Congress (don't hold your breath), the Canadian House of Commons (I won't suggest the Senate, since I believe it should be "shut down" and the Senators sent home), or more importantly, town meetings. This is where various debates can be conducted that will result in meaningful conclusions.

I am not for a moment saying that the views of certain members of our community here in ehMacLand should be stiffled, censored, accepted, rejected, ignored or vilified. They are the expressed views held by some here in this community of Mac users (or near Mac users). Expressing one's view is a democratic right and responsibility, be it here or in the US. I have openly expressed my views when asked a direct question, or if I feel strongly that I feel a certain way about a certain issue, be it the war in Iraq, religion, sexual orientation, gender-related issues, Mac-related issues, the weather or doxies. Some have blasted me for my expressed views, some have praised me for these views. Some ignore my posts, while others may seek them out. That is their right. Some people come close to abusing that right, and do not keep in mind the responsibility that goes along with free speech. What to do with these people? Let them vent/rant, provide a counter-balance to their views, and move on. So long as they are not openly trying to force someone off of this forum, or promoting hatred and a call to violence towards a person or group of people, then let them speak.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Dr. G thankyou. I have no argument with stating views and I hear some steel in your mild manner.
The quid pro quo being that inflexible mindsets with belittling language risk reply in kind.....what happened here.
I've got to go but I'll comment further


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, I don't approve of the "belittling language" that has been utilized by some in this community. Some taunts are mildly annoying, but are harmless and are not meant to hurt or belittle (e.g., Macspectrum's use of the phrase "Dr.G. wrote on his Dell...,", which he has actually stopped using, much to his credit). Other posts are blunt and hurtful, and I have expressed my views against this form of post. 

I still contend that the high road should be the route the Three aMigoes (as in Macdoc, Macspectrum and Dr.D., aka Marc in real life) takes in times of moral crisis. 

Excelsior!!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Wit a repartee can indeed be edgy at time - my daughter and I banter with some real zingers in the chit chat at times.
I will tend to respond to posts in kind. Humour begets humour, thoughtful begets thoughtful, light hearted banter......etc.
Arrogant "brooks no tolerance for other views" posts I will respond to in kind as well.
Results vary - the "Gay Marriage" verbal battle ended well with a far more reasonable set of posts resulting....but not without several sharp exchanges to get there.
Macnutt winds up from time to time but a lobbed salmon usually successfully keeps tones him down a bit.
Tolerance for other viewpoints is so critical in today's world - a number of articles have claimed that the ability to develop civil on line discourse is one of the most pressing issues facing the world. I think it was the New York Times suggesting methods of moderating that supressed the abusive and perjorative posts while maintaining lively and passionate arguments.
Exactly wht this community is attempting.
Here's an interesting conceit. I like his concept of the coffeehouse discussions in furthering social cohesion. "Urbanity" is an excellent word. http://www.wealthbondage.com/2003/03/02.html#a258 

This link shows how managing the issue has become important. http://www.econtentmag.com/r15/2002/smith7_02.html


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

One final comment to macello, before I move on to see what else has been going on in my absence...

I'm sorry that you think that my comments were somehow appropriated from a Hollywood movie.

They were not.

Read my post again, and imagine yourself as a Canadian in his mid-twenties who suddenly finds himself stuck in the middle of something that he never expected. Something that just erupted suddenly and with ferocious violence on a nice sunny day in a little tropical backwater town where he was working.

That was the first time I saw such things, and it remains the most vivid in my memory. It was, unfortunately, not the last.

And I'm afraid it wouldn't make a very good movie.

Sorry you didn't understand.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

One final comment to macello, before I move on to see what else has been going on in my absence...

I'm sorry that you think that my comments were somehow appropriated from a Hollywood movie.

They were not.

Read my post again, and imagine yourself as a Canadian in his mid-twenties who suddenly finds himself stuck in the middle of something that he never expected. Something that just erupted suddenly and with ferocious violence on a nice sunny day in a little tropical backwater town where he was working.

That was the first time I saw such things, and it remains the most vivid in my memory. It was, unfortunately, not the last.

And I'm afraid it wouldn't make a very good movie.

Sorry you didn't understand.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Accidental double post. Sorry.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Dr. G. typed on his De...
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> (e.g., Macspectrum's use of the phrase "Dr.G. wrote on his Dell...,", which he has actually stopped using, much to his credit). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dr.,
Please note that I rarely if ever use the word "write" when quoting someone from ehMac. I use the more generic; "typed."

Please update your files accordingly.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Tolerance for other viewpoints is so critical in today's world - a number of articles have claimed that the ability to develop civil on line discourse is one of the most pressing issues facing the world.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you for finally agreeing with this concept. Now if we could get everyone to follow it. Maybe then more members would participate in various topics of debate without fear of being ridiculed publicly before they can be swayed to a different point of view.
I understand the disagreement to Rhodes' statements...that was never the issue, although that was the only line of explanation offered to justify the reaction to him. We have the ability, and I think resposibility, to treat opinions in the manner we would want ours treated. Although a bit startling, I didn't personally find Rhodes' approach to be offensive. I found the inability to respond in a contolled manner to be the offensive action. I know you don't see it that way , but now you know that others do. "A stone thrown doesn't require a rock thrown back". I'm no moral authority, but felt the need to address this particular matter and try to make participants stop and look at their behaviour. It's a public forum, and although many might not participate, they may be reading. The laundry is out for all to see...don't ebarrass yourselves. 
Thank you all for not initiating any shark attacks on me for playing referee.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, we need more referee-type posters. Kudos on your courage.

macspectrum, I have updated my files accordingly.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Very well said Peter!  

I have had several emails from other ehmac citizens in the past few days (one from Darrell Rhodes, as a matter of fact). They all seemed to be concerned about being "shouted down" by the prevailing opinions around here. Some asked me how I dealt with it. All expressed the desire to post what they thought...but were somewhat fearful of doing so.

I told all of them, in no uncertain terms, to "fly at it"! Say your piece, and let the rest of the citizens decide what they think about it on their own. 

But...by all means...do NOT sit there in silence and fear because you are worried about being roundly chastised by a few of the more committed among us.

We need to ALL have a voice. Good or bad, black or white, pro or con...only one thing is truly important, and that is SPEAK UP! Tell us what you think.

_EVERYBODY_ counts. No exceptions.

Personally, I'd like to see the whole world run that way. If every single person in EVERY SINGLE country had a voice in what was going on, then we probably wouldn't be facing the situation that we are currently in.

We'd be too busy with reality. Having a life. Having a family, to risk losing it all to something as stupid as one mans aspirations.

The UN would work like it's supposed to, Saddam wouldn't exist, Slobodan Milosevic would never have been able to order the mass slaughter of thousands of people...just because they weren't of the same ethnic group as he was...Rwanda would never have happened...Somalia would not have either...Robert Mugabe would have been ejected from office long ago and the people of Zimbabwe would not be starving.....

Don't even get me started on North Korea, or any of the failed communist states.

No...as far as I'm concerned, we _all_ should have a voice, and not be afraid to use it. All of the time.

Especially here at ehmac.

Apparently, there are quite a number of people out there who think this is _not_ the case right now.

Too bad.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Edification On The Way of the Forum. 

My review of Darryl Rhodes' performance along with a bit of macnutt's defense is indeed similar to my review of a movie that I might find particularly revolting inclusive of the razzies.

That I do not disparage either as people is evident in past posts on this forum and I allow to all their own understanding of a Higher Power be it a god or a dog; nor do I question the life changing impact of traumatic personal experiences. That is crucial to my outlook. Mine I choose not to publicize.

As a performer I have been both savaged and praised in review for reasons I know to be valid or not. I could not progress otherwise.

But I choose to step onto the stage.

I assume that posts here are not private internal ruminations and that they are freely offered on this stage for response positive or not.

On September 11, 2001, a group of religious fanatics shouting the absolute supremacy of their own god over all others committed a horrifying mass murder.
I am reminded of my feelings at that time as I watch the revenge bombing of a nation today.

I was raised as a youth in a Canadian community which glorified in sermon the very same fanaticism set out in the Old Testament as a message from a god that I still fail to understand. The sermons frightened me as a child and still remind me (thanks to certain views held here) vividly of a society dominated by male elders who took it upon themselves to rule their flock absolutely and to beat the young into communal submission. This was also ingrained in the secular school system at the time. Authority was violent. There were no choices.

For many, the bloodless psychical revolution of the "60's" saved future generations from the grip of that widely pervasive and punishing ethos.

Today as you must be aware my residual reaction to violence and even a suggestion of it's necessity still remains visceral (hot button), but happily that world is now all but gone from our lives in this country.

I have no theological pretenses but how the barbaric Hammurabic code of the old testament today can still override the humane code of the new really pains my heart. 

I appreciate the edifying URLs that macdoc posted above. The first profound to me. I can learn from this and I'm never the same person I was yesterday.

Hey! at 87 posts I'm a babe in the woods.

...oops, I just read macnutt's post which I really like ... but the politics ..... well ... you know.


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

Thankyou MacDoc, somehow that word slipped through without me picking up on it. 
I will be back with questions to test your mental prowess. I am sure you will be up to the task. I want to take some time and read your strings again. This will help me to understand you a little better as I find your comments..........telling.
Be back soon.........


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Just what was it you didn't pick up on??

your fractured English?

or inabiity to listen?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Hey! Coolit .... some of us do jingoes for a living to feed the babes ok? You can hear moi all up in the new (still secret) spot for the 2004 Ford "Freedom Car". With this cuteute (looks like a giant sneaker) you'll SO need Iraq.
Speaking of looks .... check out the super cute outfits that Army V Corps has scored just in time for the gig. Marines might think they're girls.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Well...I've gone over macello's last post about fifteen times and, I've just gotta say this....

I have NO idea what he was trying to convey there!

Sorry. I may be a total idiot ( a serious probablity, really) But I really do NOT understand what he was trying to say. 

Please enlighten me. I am listening. Honest.

As for Darrell Rhodes...I am happy he is back.  


He has a singular take on world events...and I honestly think that he has been in some situations that would change the average Canadian's mind. 

On pretty well everything. 

Really. No sh*t!

He's got something to say. Something that may make all of us stop and take note.

Give him a chance. 

Everybody deserves to be heard. New or old. Good or bad. Whatever their politics are, or whatever their beliefs are...or wherever they are coming from.

We need this. It will make us stronger. It will make us _better._

Honest.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macello you slip so many slightly warped takes into every paragraph I have to reread it 8 times to get them all.

















BTW your "Forum" post was appreciated. You almost got through it without in-cheek tongue residence.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macnutt - translation
Chill out...Macello does jingles for a living to feed the kids ( a pun on jingoism)
You can hear Macello in the advertising for the 2004 Ford
Cuteute - driving this small SUV means you will need Iraqs oil.
The Army V Corp crack I think refers to this http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/camouflage010130.html 

••
As for Rhodes...just what within his consistent rant in fractured English did you find worth listening to.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I appreciate everyone's opinions; however, the tone of this thread has been rather hostile and edgy. As for the initial topic, I feel like nothing has been resolved by the discussion here. 

Darrel Rhodes, maybe I'm being fussy, but could you please cut down on the "......." They create an odd tone for your writing. It makes you seem fragmented or unfocused. Perhaps this is your desired effect. I just wanted to let you know. I'm assuming it might be a point of annoyance or contention for MacDoc as well when he referred to your grammar; however, I'd guess it also had to do with some of your earlier posts that read as hallucinatory or dream-like due to their fragmentation. I personally felt like I was in a Kubrik movie or something, which was interesting but not very productive in discussion. I do mean this as contructive criticism and I hope it's taken as such.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Being in a Kubrik movie could very well be construed as a _good_ thing.  

And I will re-iterate...I really liked Darrell Rhodes's posts. He has a style that I think adds to what we have here.

Out there...for sure...but not much beyond what I keep saying. In substance anyway.


And with a certain flair that I find quite intriguing.

Let him speak his mind. Let's let everone speak their mind, free of fear. No matter who they are...or where they are from.

It can only make us stronger. More vital. More real.

Fair enough?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Addendum Re: Fora

Absolute Truth Forbids All Discussion.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macello,
small point of information.

you can discuss. you just cannot disagree.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macspectrum,

can we agree to cuss dis ?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter - both my and Macello's initial response WAS in a controlled manner and appropriate to poke a stick at someone being pompous.
I respond in kind - toss a rock - it'll get tossed back.
Once the poster just dug himself in deeper, revealing more certainly the kind of attitude that was clear to several of us in the first place, then Macello, at my request, simply stated what what really his impression.

Macnutt - exactly - it's very possible to "say YOUR piece" with passion and conviction.

I agree 100%
".by all means...do NOT sit there in silence and fear because you are worried about being roundly chastised by a few of the more committed among us."

"we all should have a voice, and not be afraid to use it. All of the time."

We all have a range of tolerance and passion
When GordGuide says
"At the same time as this missile incident with Iran, Turkey was announcing it was sending troops into Iraq. Can you say disaster? Yikes!"
I get REALLLY afraid cuz Gord's posts are always so wonderfully informative yet dispassionate that when he does let a bit of "opinion" loose it has immense impact.

Dr. G will let slip a subtle hint and once in a while gets his passion up but then he diverts into humour.

I will stir the pot a bit and being a centrist take on either side if I feel the point needs challenging.

BUT there was nothing of civil discourse in Rhodes posts - only arrogance and distain...and I WILL CALL ANYONE ON THAT and have in the past.
Most like Macnutt and Michael will calm the rhetoric and work to make their point with out perjoratives and polemics.
I'm extremely impressed with Macnutt who in the past at times came off as bit of a rightwing ranter..and proudly so, has really put the effort into language that persuades and entices you to his viewpoint.
Macnutt look at the difference in the language and approach between your posts and Rhodes - you acknowledge others "space".
Rhodes flat out said diverse opinion was a social disease.
So what should I and Macello and others infer from that.....
That, he Rhodes..the Lion of ehMac..dressers of the movers and shakers in Canada......from on high.... pronounces he is in possession of the truth and the rest are lost in the wilderness. This all couched in disparaging and threatening language.

Macnutt indeed there is a prevailing viewpoint here and across Canada - you see it as left from your position - I see it as centrist. There are many voices in that zone - but "shouted down" is not the apt image in my view.
Being taken to task for a rigid viewpoint is far from being shouted down. 

Dr. G chooses not to take the time to engage "rigid viewpoints".
Macnutt can take himself with a grain of salt as can CubaMark as our resident leftie on the opposite political spectrum.
Even Bush can see how others view him as "the toxic Texan" altho he rarely loses the smug sanctity.
I mean he used the word "Crusade" after 911 despite being warned that it would feed Middle Eastern fears of Western aggression.

But where in any of his posts did Rhodes, despite being taken to task by a surprisingly large number of eHmacians, show even a hint of anything but condescending arrogance.

Here is what I find so ironic..Rhodes preaches
"speech can create a vile atmosphere that drives people away or one which is open and valuable discourse."
This despite being taken to task for exactly what he is decrying by quite a number of thread participants.
How not to earn respect  
First - be condescending
Second - fail to take a hint
Third - fail to LISTEN AT ALL when bluntly taken to task by a number of participants

Can I ask what redeeming virtue for the community might remain??


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

Well good golly Miss Molly......I discussed leaving this forum with someone you all know and love........after being accussed of all manner of nasty narrowness.......the least I could do is take time to listen and get to know where you are coming from. Lots of fireworks....... I promise you a much higher level of both questions and comments, but I will use words that are understandable. (what the hell is gingoistic, were you being condesending and saying something nasty?)
I could look it up but hearing your definition would be far more colorful I am sure.
Being accused of being NARROW minded. Does that mean that you are WIDE minded and all knowing? How did you get sooo WIDE?
I must know more, I can probably learn alot from your intellect. By the very pronouncement of that judgement, some have declared that they themselves are the ENLIGHTENED ONES, and by that very statement their fingers point back and...
......oh should I say it.......are themselves appearing arrogant?......... (Peter S.. you were correct)
If you are proclaiming that you are the wise suppository of knowledge and I am subject to your deposits (or any other descenters) then I have some questions..............
They will be interesting ones.....................
It will lead to way more entertaining and stimulating conversation....of that I am sure.

And yes....I am SWORD......wow! Ur so clever! Good on ya! Someone advised me....(another EhmacR) that perhaps due to my very history as a **** disturber ( I ask hard questions that peal back layers some people would just as soon lay covered) that I should be anonymous.........not necessary as I am never passive........but I can very gracious and polite for a **** disturber. I will be respectful and try and contribute some quality.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

This going to get good! The heat is still on, the points have ben made (over and over in some cases) and all the players are back in the sandbox. Let's see now if everyone can ram their toy trucks together without getting so personal. Don't let the sarcasm trick you into over-reacting.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well you are certainly consistent.

The word is "jingoistic" 
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of English)
jingoism
noun  

the extreme belief that your own country is always best, which is often shown in enthusiastic support for a war against another country 
••
Watch those big words they'll getcha every time

"the wise suppository of knowledge and I am subject to your deposits (or any other descenters) then I have some questions.............."


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Macello, An enquiring mind would like to know whether the original name of the 2004 Ford Freedom car was "Ford France", "Ford Parisien", "Ford Statue of Liberty" or "Ford Chiraq".

Darryl, am looking foward to your future posts being a cut above the rest.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Darryl Rhodes is not without a mote of the facetious. The prose is a bit crusty to chew on but he drowns it in ketchup and relish.
Definitely not up to Kubrick's classy scripts. 
A sentimental affinity for Tobe Hooper to say the least. http://us.imdb.com/Title?0072271 

Topic: Do criminals use registered weapons??

Darrell Rhodes (Topic Starter)
New Neighbour 
Member # 1237 

posted March 24, 2003 10:41 PM                    
" I found that Spearguns work very well. 
Tough to run when there is a nylon cord tied to the spear. 
Chainsaws cause the bad guys a little distress......especially when they hear you trying to start it while waiting for the police to arrive.....must be those weird movies they watch....ya think? ''

One can see that DR is a little more relaxed in his own NRA group setting .

I do the little dotty lines for pregnant and meaningful pause myself.

The gentleman has indeed something to say but what do you do with all the leftover ketchup?

I know that macnutt means well in his defense if only to keep DR from going all the way out there with Dr. Strangelove.

It's just that we don't all feel DR's pain.

macdoc: The V Corp's stunning fashion statement is definitely more girly than the new marine camies with the little faux patrician emblems embedded right in the fabric. 
I'm concerned that the marines might not be able to deal with this gracefully and end up using the V corps as Bush is using Blair. 

Have you noticed how Bush/Blair tear up and choke real quick lately?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

used to be jwoodget

Something like Ford "Libre" after DeGaulle. The target looked like recruitable nike types.


----------



## rhino (Jul 10, 2002)

"Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War"

As having given DR the original invitation to join the ehMac community as a means of providing technical support, I thought his forum comments, as they began, to be a humourous banter on gun control and a way for him to stir the pot. 

I had found the previous ehMac threads to be thought provoking, informative and a way to share comments, kudos and do-do's. But usually framed within at least a veneer of respect. That is the way I was taught. And can you not attract more flies with honey, or would DR prefer offal? Of course the choice is his and our reaction to the offerings is what makes the discourse volatile in a positive sense if not vitreolic to the negative.

I've lain in the weeds for a while now with the odd line or two with high respect for the vast majority here. Some great stuff been going on. Even from the infamous Trevor Morris. (I kinda miss him sometimes) Wouldn't he be fun right about now.

DR, I hardly think we knew, ye.

Macnutt, CubaMark, Dr.G among others, have shared generics and specifics about their backgrounds that frame their comments in context. Perhaps knowing where you're coming from might ease the tension, add some tolerance and understanding of your point of view. 

Just one man's opinion. And I know ye a wee better than most here.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Rhino - thank you.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"all the players are back in the sandbox. Let's see now if everyone can ram their toy trucks together without getting so personal. Don't let the sarcasm trick you into over-reacting."

a ) it's not play
b) over-reacting see a)

I might have fun here and do the banter but I invest time and effort into ehMac because I think it's important.
Sandbox doesn't cut it
see A)


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macdoc: 
someone's always gonna pee in the sandbox.


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by macdoc:
Sandbox doesn't cut it
see A)[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


A think a sandbox does cut it quite nicely 

We have cries of my grammar's better than your grammar.
We have a diction impaired kid who people have trouble understanding even though they hear his message 8 times.
We have the usual ? if you don?t agree with my view I?ll throw sand in your face? crowd.
We have the sandbox bully who claims superiority over the rest because he was potty trained first and goes to a private kindergarten.

However David it does give you a chance to pull out your personal soapbox and bash Bush and all those that don?t agree with you.

You should rename this thread Blunt Force Trauma.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Rhino, an excellent point! ("Macnutt, CubaMark, Dr.G among others, have shared generics and specifics about their backgrounds that frame their comments in context. Perhaps knowing where you're coming from might ease the tension, add some tolerance and understanding of your point of view."). Context is everything. This is what some of the news from various "hot spots" in the world seem to be lacking. My son wanted to know why everyone was against Israel in the Middle East, why there were problems in Korea, and what was the "cold war". Seems that these issues all came up in his Canadian Economics class in school (he is in grade 10) and his teacher glossed over it without providing the background knowledge to help them understand the issues of today. Sad.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

re: pee

that was fast.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well Andy that's why I didn't bother to participate in your trolling post as that's clearly your take on the entire forum.
My question to you is, why bother. 
You are content in your viewpoint and not particularly willing to contribute anything other than sarcasm and pot stirring for your own amusement.
Your take on the SAS is worthwhile insight and how Blair and the UK differs from the US but your choice is not to make your insight available.
Again then, why bother? 
You know very well you COULD contribute. You clearly don't think it's worthwhile.
Why bother.

"We have cries of my grammar's better than your grammar."
I'm a bit more subtle than that Andy - read it more closely if you care to.

eHmac is a soapbox for everyone including you - you treat it with distain - I don't.
Yes I think Bush and Co are dangerous as do many others..some admire him. Yes I think fundamentalist fanatics on both sides are turning this into a Holy war.
Where is my bashing of others?
With the obvious exception on one poster, who even you took a minor shot at....tho' it was an excellent opportunity to exercise your caustic wit to it's fullest .


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

MacDoc, Macello, and the others who have seemed to respond in there own unique way.
Before you immediately pick up rocks again, perhaps a quick trip in the "wayback machine"
might help. 
I believed in sex, drus, and rock & roll, and I lived up what I believed in an exemplary way that could have made me a priest in Corinth.....there are men on this forum who knew me, so I am not blowing smoke.
In my late 20's I took 3 years off, moved to LA , lived in Westwood, and went to Study Theology.
I wanted to know what everyone believed and why. I was not interested in opinions, just facts.
I wanted objective, subject, historial, geographical etc etc. proof. Did it exist? If so then prove it.
Our first course provided us with the necessary tools that would allow to "nail to the wall" any opinions or sunshine being pumped by the professors we studied under. Many were from Dallas Theological Seminary, guest speakers came in from all over the world. We studied everything from Angelology to Demonology, the Vedas, Buddism, complete, no holes barred.
After the smoke and flame had cleared, the tombstones of religion were neatly laid out , their leaders, their followers, .........only one was left standing.
This was in 1976, 77,78.....so the info is tarnished, but recoverable off my hard disk.
I have been reading for about 6 hours today trying to do some servicing on my cerebral hard drive, as time has created alot of fragmented files.
How you filter and process information is worthy of investigation. I am ready to hear, how you have arrived at your position and am prepared to question you on what you do think is the right way to think........but be prepared to back it up.

If you are committed to intellectual integrity.........
Let's see who knows the difference between myth, legend, and reality.
What do you know for sure? What do you pre-suppose to be true when you contimplate the meaning and purpose of your life? 
People with frontal labotomies need not enter the discussion.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Aside from a spell checker which we all could use at times you've certainly made a community effort in my eyes.
I would suggest that you post a new topic - I'd be happy to contribute.
My journey and Macello's were the opposite direction to yours and both of us have deep seated suspicion and distrust of organized religion and ANYONE claiming "insider info".
There are a couple of threads already in the Kitchen 'Why are we here" in particular that hizhonur the Mayor started that could provide you some background for viewpoints and segue perfectly into your questions.
Or start it fresh.
You might be surprised at the diversity on the topic.
Re-visiting one's world view and the reasons for it is a worthwhile endeavor. Often it re-affirms - sometimes it leads to new insights....for instance there was a Gay Marriage thread that caught me completely by surprise.
That one also might be an interesting read......might get your back up but you'll certainly see community dynamics.









At any rate - welcome to the community.
Ask away.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I'm game for this new discussion as long as it is a _discussion_. From the sounds of it, this discussion may require some ground rules, as well as a lot of thinking, reflection and research. Mmmm daunting and exciting!

As for playing in the sandbox, "play" might be an appropriate description if we were adapting the term from Jacques Derrida's "jeu."


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Jacques Derrida's "jeu." ?????

Passionate, heated, well thought out, a dose of humour, ...recipe for success.
I think Darryl gets the idea, the community has worked it's way through a few "hot topics" before.
Abortion, religion, politics - all those "no-nos -" have been tackled not without a few spouts of flame but I'm agin too formal a structure.
"It's The Kitchen fer chrisake" not the UN


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

Well David why bother??? 

Because there is a core of people respectfully expressing their opinions and being interested an exchange of views which respond to other people’s post. On the other hand there are many that cut and paste articles from various sources to express their views. Sorry but I’m interested in the core person’s viewpoint and how they arrived at it from their experinvce. Cut and paste don’t work for me it’s a cop out for every article that is offered there is another that refutes it. 

As you know I’m a passionate person and tend to be sometimes be very black and white in my opinions, take that for what it’s worth.

I also don’t need guys like Marcello calling me a liar with regard to what I do for a living. That’s sandbox stuff certainly not conducive to a honest exchange of viewpoints. So I certainly don’t need to sharing views about the SAS and then have to justify that I really do know what I’m talking about. 

Also religious intolerance is not something that is part of my makeup. You have some people around here that use religion as an argument. Which brings a slew of attacks on the guy. Once again it’s somebody else’s viewpoint and should have the same standing in a discussion as yours or mine. 

Trolling for a response no when I wrote the post (Anti war idiots) I had just watched a whack of news reports and these people inflamed my sensibilities, much like Bush and his God statement inflamed you. Pot calling the kettle black?

I find Canadians rather laconic by nature and to get their REAL personal opinions out sometime one has to stir the pot. 

On the other hand as I said before there are some very interesting people from a variety of backgrounds who want to exchange views and have the personal knowledge and experience to back it up.

I could go on ,but I’m writing this on a RIM on the way to the airport to do some filming and my fingernails are tired. As I said in another post I’m very interested to find out what my American crew and the people of the Islands think about Canada these days……


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Have fun - wear sunscreen.

"As you know I’m a passionate person and tend to be sometimes be very black and white in my opinions, take that for what it’s worth."
I wouldn't have guessed  

"I also don’t need guys like Marcello calling me a liar with regard to what I do for a living."
Missed that - where?? That's certainly worth a rock toss or two.

"Also religious intolerance is not something that is part of my makeup. You have some people around here that use religion as an argument. Which brings a slew of attacks on the guy. Once again it’s somebody else’s viewpoint and should have the same standing in a discussion as yours or mine."
Look at the approach Vertigogo takes with his beliefs - see any flames from me - nope. I'm quite content with varied belief systems until they get into the 'peity and sanctity mode" of dismissing others and claiming the mantle of blessed by. ________ whatever flavour of diety you'd like"
Yep I'll throw rocks but it's not just religion - I'll take a poke at US as humanity's poster boy attitude too.
I've got no problem with discussing things with Darryl - you took a shot for the same reasons I got snarky.
He's got his language toned down - now its worth while ..or not... as I see benefit.

If your post wasn't a troll and since you are taking the time to participate then I apologize BUT look at the titles...a bit different so I take your point but it's not right on the money.

Yes there are some interesting people here and also note that I know personally a number of them like Peter and Michael and yourself and sometimes there is a subtext not readily apparent.

I'm VERY glad to have your mind and wit aboard in a meaningful way even tho' I'm likely to get skinned by the latter from time to time. 
 

once more have fun..


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Darrell Rhodes
I"m no genius but using this helps me a lot: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/14348 .
X or Classic, it is one of the best tools in the virtual garage.

Are you proposing a new topic?
I would suggest in the friendliest manner that you open one on theology if that is at the core of your thesis. Those vitally interested will surely come.

I have not yet seen from you a reference to this topic heading which as a vivid paraphrase sure has long legs, but for me things get goofy







when one of many insists on having seen the end run and challenge "Let's see who knows" all others to differ. 
Betting on outcomes? Please!
If your above post was not meant as a challenge to all please clarify.
But do please share the theology. 
You've got my attention.
This IS a place for free thought, hopefully free of competition.


----------



## stinand (Jan 15, 2001)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by macdoc:
*Have fun - wear sunscreen.


*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh you poor colonial , I am BRITISH we don not wear sunscreen we control the sun!!!
Now where is that Castro guy? I'll have him overthrow Mr. Bush for you.!!!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sigh.... mad dogs and Englishmen ..of course I forgot ..how silly of me








Berry on


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

Jacques Derrida is a French literary theorist. . . oh I mean Freedom literary theorist who founded deconstructionist criticism. I'd explain but I'm not sure if I have the time or the skill to summarize such an extensive theory but I'd happily answer any specific questions or give links or reading recommendations if you're interested.

When I said "jeu," I was referring to Derrida's use of the the French word for "play." The difference is that in French "jeu" has an extra meaning: the play or adjustability within a mechanism. Therefore, play is partialy a serious matter when discussing Metaphysics, language, and theory for Derrida (and other Deconstructionists). Deconstructionists view language as a system that constructs meaning out of differences (not presence, Forms or any real signified). In particular, he's big on binaries and othering. The application is that all oppositions are in play - or part of a mechanism - and choosing one pole of the binary violently negates the other. In politics, this view is accused of leaving no room for agency or action but it just shows that all decisions are contextual and that an absolute decision (abolute in that it's right or on the side of Truth) is a fiction. Is anyone's head spinning yet?  

BTW, I've spent the last two years reading English literary theory (which is basically the philosophy of words, language and meaning). I apologize for any jargon but I am always happy to clarify if asked.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

Mon plaisir, Macdoc. 

Deconstruction is pretty important for language theory and philosophy because it signals a paradigm shift from structuralism to an open and - for lack of a better term - postmodern space. But I digress.

Peter as for your comments about spelling and grammar, I agree we should be reasonable but everyone (myself included) could benefit from more revising of their posts. Good language skills is something that I enjoy about ehMac as opposed to many other chat boards so I don't think we should be slack. Macnutt and I had a chat about this long ago in a thread far, far away. We just need to be friendly and sensible when we correct others.

And while I appreciate your moderating role Peter, just remember that no one is ever neutral. But I think you're trying your best (and doing a better job than I could do, I might add). Good work!


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Y'all! and Peter Scharman 

Have you not got the Safari browser ?
Are we drinking the same water?
The one with built in spell check?
The best bookmarker in the biz?
Another reason to get OSX already!
I've gleefully trashed those monstrous pigs that are Explorer and Netscape.
System now MS free 'cep for that cretinous WiMP.

Cynical Critic:

Beautifully said!
You have the knack for dejargoning. I learned more from your post than stuff written by the guardians at the academic gate.
Maybe because it sounds like you're describing actual and usable functions.

I'm a big fan of French thinking although much passes by my untrained enthusiasm. For me it's quite liberating after the stifling British Canadian ed of my youth. 
Alas I'm a Francophone trapped in an English mind/body.
Keep those bon mots coming.

What about a "Deconstruct this! Mother******!" topic. I would love to tell some people around here to stop othering me. See? I need help already.

I feel so much the pain of my American friends that are so embarrassed about the lately petulant Republican Guard in the Whitehouse.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Fear not macello...there are a whole lot of people, in Canada and elsewhere, who are totally embarrased by the brain-dead liberals who are currently running Canada.

Should be intersting to see which group outlives the other. And how each is treated by history.

Stay tuned.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Sometimes, we can't help ourselves. It's human nature. The styles we write with are abstractions of our persona. It was immediately obvious that SWORD was a reincarnation of Darryl Rhodes. Macnutt seems to have an overactive return key which tends to stretch his posts way beyond the actual content. Dr. G intersperses his gems with irrelevances. We all have our little ways. Nothing wrong with that and I encourage it.

I also agree with the point that the standard of writing is a cut above your average board. I think its something to do with the diversity of our country and its embracing of differences without forcing people to homogenize into a melting pot. I think this is the single most important aspect of Canadian identity and is what sets us aside, at a fundamental level, from our American neighbours. I don't mean that in a patronizing way. The Americans do a lot of things better than we. But I do think that our cosmopolitan attitudes and willingness to not only tolerate but embrace multiple cultures strengthens this society and protects us from the dangers of single-mindedness. There is always more than one side to a debate.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

macdoc wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *a ) it's not play
b) over-reacting see a)

I might have fun here and do the banter but I invest time and effort into ehMac because I think it's important.
Sandbox doesn't cut it
see A)* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I now have complete empathy for Ron MacLean when dealing with Don Cherry!  

Well, I'd have to say I'm very pleased that I stirred this whole debate on conduct. Mixed opinions have been offered as well as some insight into people’s attitudes. As expected, some will play tough regardless...that's the way they like it. Maybe I should have used the "hockey game" analogy.... some believe the game should be played in it's pure form without the violence, while others maintain that crushing checks and slugging are necessary to the "sport". So the usual small group will continue to be the participants in the hot topic discussions and the rest will sit on the sidelines. I think it's a shame; it reminds me of a closed membership club, although it's not. However, the more you use the  and  icons, the better your chance of gaining membership.
On the bright side, everyone is talking to each other and perhaps macnutt will have an ally…..macnutt and Daryll Rhodes: that should be an interesting balance.
On a closing side note…I brought out the observation that some throw the same mud that they wear. Spelling (and sentence structure)…give me a break! Firstly, there is no spell check on ehMac…you need to flip-flop to a word processor. Secondly, it’s pretty obvious that most here seldom do that. Read your own posts and you’ll see. I don’t think it’s a big deal as long as the point gets across without too many errors. Minor point—major observation.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

CC - thanks it's been a while since I've looked at language theory seriously and I imagine the field has moved along remarkably.
I was tempted to "deconstruct" a certain couple of posts here but then the the fur would really have flown. Macello in his egnimatic prose actually did a pretty good job.
Language construction, philosophy and metaphysics challenges the mind and really makes one contemplate how we experience and interpret the world and communicate that experience to others.
It's remarkable our brains are wired in such a way as to do it at all.








Anyway thanks for the explanation - by necessity brief.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter you are nowhere near as mouthy as Don Cherry  
Hockey might be a better analogy but it's still a "play" scenario and I don't deal with ehMAc on that basis.
It's not sport Peter.
Maintaining a level of discussion and interaction that's both meaningful and passionate without disintegration is an important exercise in group dynamics and effective use of language.
Do you consider your interaction with your church as play? - not likely ..you take it seriously and do your best to participate in a useful and forward going manner.
I don't ask Dr. G to say more for "sport." I value his time and insight,
Managing dialogue and differing viewpoints while keeping the discussion going is, in this microcosm of very similar backgrounds, good exercise for the far harder interactions going on in the world right now. Our dichotomies here reflect the debates going on around the world and how WE as a group manage them is important.

Regarding "grammar and spell checking" there was a subtext that you an Andy overlooked that is meaningless at this point since the basis for the interplay has gone.
Re "mud" - I and some others "RESPOND" in kind - that's part of how I manage dialogue. Some sit it out..I don't.
As you well know...snick.  

You ARE permitted to tear clumps of your own hair out in frustration in the privacy of your home.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macnutt

Harper vs. Martin? Okidoke .... 10 years and counting.

How is history treating Nixon? Agnew? Ford? Reagan? Bush 1? Quayle?









Chretien plus the unwilling G-4 have known all along of the brutality Republicans would dispense and acted in concert upon certain principles.

The willing are waiting for the Wolfowitz EXPLOSION OF JOY!

"I think when the people of Basra no longer feel the threat of that regime, you are going to see an explosion of joy and relief - but right now they're still under threat, they're still not convinced. 
Paul Wolfowitz 
story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/2883971.stm 

Published: 2003/03/25 21:05:25


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I noticed that Mr. Perle's firing received very little press and very little discussion here.

I guess he must have told Rumsfeld et al: "guaranteed victory in a week or it's my job."


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

He got caught dipping his "spoon" into the honey pot without prior scrubbing.

I sent the following to a friend recently: http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/mdc_team_5.html 

His reply:
I'm presently en route to the Barbados from Aruba having just passed thru the Panama Canal a few days ago!
Thanks for you email, however was barred from opening(you'll get a kick out of this)as either the file is too large or the contents not appropriate for downloading at this P&O Cruiseline Terminal.Hmmm- I wonder what you sent.

xxxxxxx

My reply: "file size is 4k"

I guess it got scrubbed.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote to Peter: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> * Peter you are nowhere near as mouthy as Don Cherry * <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ain't that the truth! However, remember that I was referring to you as the Don and me as the Ron









<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Hockey might be a better analogy but it's still a "play" scenario and I don't deal with ehMAc on that basis.
It's not sport Peter.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think that has become obvious, but maybe a bit less physical play would invite others to participate, unless of course, you don't want the "lesser" players to downgrade the intensity of the game. Speaking of "game", in your own opinion, is it more important to be the winner or just to enjoy the challenge of bending other’s mindset? Just a question, not a dig.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Maintaining a level of discussion and interaction that's both meaningful and passionate without disintegration is an important exercise in group dynamics and effective use of language.
Do you consider your interaction with your church as play? - not likely ..You take it seriously and do your best to participate in a useful and forward going manner.
I don't ask Dr. G to say more for "sport." I value his time and insight,
Managing dialogue and differing viewpoints while keeping the discussion going is, in this microcosm of very similar backgrounds, good exercise for the far harder interactions going on in the world right now. Our dichotomies here reflect the debates going on around the world and how WE as a group manage them is important.*\ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm in full agreement here. The intensity of discussion and challenge was never questioned. The issue I brought up was the tone and insulting nature of some responses. Managing dichotomies is usually skillfully done in the threads, but I don't think rudeness or insult is a productive tool. You should have been a politician.... you’re always very good at twisting the argument and answering eloquently to a different angle of the discussion. This must have been part of Debating 101: How To Successfully Evade The Question. This is actually a compliment, even if sometimes frustrating.  
Where was ehMax in all of this??? I was hoping for a little support in this, but since the sharks didn't come after me, maybe he thought it best to let me tread water on my own. I'm thankful for having completed this exercise of expression with all body parts still intact. Mission accomplished and file closed. I can only hope that something positive was achieved


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

Thank you for the kind words Macello. I appreciate the compliment because I like cutting through jargon as much as possible and it's hard to do with dense theory.

As for othering, that's how wars (verbal or physical) are basically fought. Issues have to be polarized for nations to proceed in a military action (at least in justifying it).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter: re mouthy - allow me a morsel of credit







it's called repartee. I knew what you meant and flipped it over - it's part of what we are discussing here

You are still viewing this as a game - it's not a more serious game - it's NOT a game. 
ehMac is a community of people just like a church is - are their winners and losers in church interactions??
Of course it can get loud and boisterous and mean spirited but effective moderators, appointed or not, work to keep the community active but without rancour. The community is most often self correcting.
Call it a dance if you wish another analogy
It's ideally a graceful interaction within a community....
If some one stomps onto the dance floor, gets loud, flails their arms they are taken to task by the other dancers.
They either stomp away in disgust or join the kind of dance being played at the time.
You and Dr. G might be doing a quick arm in arm vaudeville step all on your own with the others clapping on the sidelines.
Another a slower and more contemplative waltz step.
Others a light hearted jig about fast cars.
Still others a solemn dirge for a world at war.
Like any skill, there are dancers that do very well, steps we can't always follow and we admire their ability.
Take Gordguide as an example, graceful and accurate steps, calm cool and collected, never breaks a sweat..
There are those that try and make the dance fun for everyone, others that prefer to do a foxtrot to every tune and a Cuban that has the salsa moves down and gets his steps into most tunes with lots of passion.  
It's a community and we all have to manage it to make it prosper. It's not about winners and losers.

I'm a wordsmith, my writing and language use helps me make my living - I enjoy high level discussions and there are those here that can blow me away. 
But I RESPOND in kind - part of wordsmithing is to know when a sharper retort is useful.
What WAS the result of several members taking Daryll to task??? He left the floor, stomped off and THEN with encouragement, realized it was not an inherently hostile community and joined the dance, with his own style as we all have, but with respect to the tunes being played.
And he was welcomed.
But it took some sharply worded interaction to get there.
I ASKED Macello to lay out why he reacted to show clearly what got my back up, along with many others as it obviously wasn't clear to some what the problem was. Macello said when asked, what I COULD have said and he COULD have said in the first place...but we chose a moderate response initially. 
Macello IS a wordsmith for a living and he condenses side notes, oblique references and multi-lingual puns into a couple of sentences - enough to get me laughing in awe and driving our plain spoken westerner to distraction.








Debating is a formal structure and I've never been trained in it and this is not that kind of exchange. Debating is designed to have winners and losers, dialogue is not.
I don't evade questions but I may well take an oblique or alternative view, as I did with the Don Cherry bit above and I do take it as a compliment - it's making you think hard about what you write.

Realize Peter, because we've been almost life-long friends you get a bit more time and low level needling. Part of this is to get your confidence in your own abilities up. "the "lesser" players "...that's a very negative statement and certainly does not reflect my view but somehow you are thinking it.
Hey, bringing up kids with a feisty, well read and well spoken lady like Maureen would certainly have most anyone shaking their heads at times  
But you carved out your own style, the "emoticon master" of us all and some of those are far more appropriate than the best prose....the guy poking his head out the window was perfect.
ehMac is not about competition it's about community building so views and information can be shared in a casual yet reasonable manner.
That's why I came up with the The Kitchen analogy for this forum- cuz that's where many discussions like those undertaken here, take place in Canada. Not too formal, really amongst friends, but where your hair can be let down and a bit of loud talk and needling is tolerated.
The Town Hall covers the Mac world very well with a different tone.
People's problems are taken seriously in Emergency Room
The Trading Post covers off the town marketplace.
It's a community.
Contributions welcome.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Well said (as usual) macdoc. Ever wonder why the large cities have 3 or 4 daily papers (with 6-8 minority papers also available)? The news is the same, the depth, spin, professionalism, background, target audience, etc. are different. I think the ehMac community is learning as it goes. Like any community it has happy moments and sad moments and is as diverse as the country we live in. But its when the sh*t starts hitting the fan that its the most important time to speak up. There are decisions and directions that affect us all. No one person can speak for all as no one person can possibly have experienced the sum total of our experiences.

I dislike the sand box analogy due to it devaluing the "product". While what we say and post has no immediate impact on the conflict in Iraq, for example, it likely is influencing how we think about things, how we react to others who display opposing opinions in our real worlds and, in the end, is adding to our individual knowledge base. There are many "trivial" pursuits in life and posting to a board is one of them. But it is not an isolated nor irrelevant pursuit, rather its a pixel in the big picture.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Macdoc wrote to Peter: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*Peter: re mouthy - allow me a morsel of credit it's called repartee. I knew what you meant and flipped it over - it's part of what we are discussing here* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sorry, you missed the point of the tease...I wasn't alluding to mouthiness, but rather stubbornness. "Who, me!", he says









<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Of course it can get loud and boisterous and mean spirited but effective moderators, appointed or not, work to keep the community active but without rancour* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's what I was trying to do. I suspect it was partially successful.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *What WAS the result of several members taking Darryl to task??? He left the floor, stomped off and THEN with encouragement, realized it was not an inherently hostile community and joined the dance,* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's where you and I saw it through totally different coloured glasses and you refuse to acknowledge that I had a valid point (which, of course is only my opinion, but others share it). Taking to task is one thing, but the rudeness and insolence was disturbing, regardless of how Darryl’s tone was perceived. Assumptions were made and he was ridiculed publicly. I think I've repeated myself enough times on this. And sure, he had the guts to come back, but certainly not due to any action by the offending parties (where has Britnell been, by the way?)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Realize Peter, because we've been almost life-long friends you get a bit more time and low level needling. Part of this is to get your confidence in your own abilities up. "the "lesser" players "...that's a very negative statement and certainly does not reflect my view but somehow you are thinking it.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you for being so gracious and patient with me. It's nice to hear that I'm not a 'lesser player" but need to get my confidence and abilities up. I'm not offended, as I don't offend easily...I just wanted you to look at what you said. I realize that I'm not a cerebral match for many of you, as I'm not overly well read (but I'm NOT dumb) and only have a high school degree. I have contributed thoughts on other threads with good results, but have also been on the receiving end of insult due to disagreement during a "hot topic" discussion and I have to say that it wasn't an experience I care to endure. Others don't attempt offering an opinion at all because of this same concern. Head to head debate is one thing...intolerance for another’s opposing point of view and disregard for feelings is another. I used this occurrence to voice my opinion...you challenged...and I stood my ground, just as you have. I hope you have respect for that and don't really regard this as needling. As a friend, I know you're not a malicious type but like to debate (almost said play) hard. And I don't pick fights; I stand up for people’s rights. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Good night all!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

One small and tiny thought here macdoc...

With regards to my "overactive return key":

When I first started posting here, I layed out all of my long-winded rants in one continuous paragraph, without any spacing at all.

Ehmax took me to task about this, and I found that when I re-read them, even _I_ felt the need to "skim" a bit.

So, I started to hit the return button to seperate everything a bit. And it made it more readable. At least in my mind.

It seems to work.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I could, of course, just break up each of my longish posts into four or more seperate ones.

That would put me at...oh, I don't know...about four thousand or so..right about now, eh?

Yikes!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt,
you catch heck for not using the return key, then catch it again for using it.

when i 1st started posting, i also caught some flack for my use of the return key.

just do what i do and invoke "literary licence" and "damn the torpedoes!"


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I'm with you on this one, Michael.  

The heck with what anyone else thinks...just DO IT!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

as one of my posts about 2 weeks or so said; everyone should be able to say what they want. if they are out of line, the mayor will step in.

i recognize that ehMac is not a democracy and am willing to be disciplined as the mayor sees fit. it is the assumed agreement we all make when jumping on board.

also from that post; "No quarter given. None asked for."


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I personally like the spaced out sentences. Use the return key as you see fit. It makes things easier and less daunting to read, IMHO. However, that doesn't mean that the occcasional reasonably sized paragraph isn't welcome. Some ideas get lonely without a friend or two close by.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Wasn't me niggling about return key.








I think it makes items stand out and complete the thought.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

JW - yep diversity is a key - entertaining a variety of opinions and viewpoints is most critical to communiites and nations.
I only take one exception.
I would never view having a "conversation" with a friend or group of friends in the community as trivial under any circumstances.
As I mentioned before a number of "think tanks" view this online community building and management of discouse as a key to a better world. I agree.
I know that you intended but I think "trivial" is the wrong word.
It's terrifically important interaction even if its a casual "night out on the dance floor" for some.  The dance hall brings people together and provides a vital, not trivial, sense of community.
I'm far more aware of the diversity of this country and Mac users after having spun out a few steps.
Other than that quibble, thanks for taking the time to consider my approach on this.
ehMac is a really valuable and interesting community to many of us.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Peter
"Thank you for being so gracious and patient with me. It's nice to hear that I'm not a 'lesser player" but need to get my confidence and abilities up"

Ummm where did I say patient and gracious and where did I say anything about abilities???








I said confidence. Our long adventures in life just let me needle you a bit more freely...inside knowledge so to speak and I take the same liberty with others I know personally.. but just like I and others said to the mechanic who was viewing his skill set negatively against others here, we all have talents of a different nature and it's really important NOT to devalue them in your own mind.
I asked Dr. G to participate more....is that somehow an oblique questioning of his ability...ask HIM.
I asked where Cuba Mark is. I encourage, needle, stir the pot, play word games, ask for more info, ask for participation.
That's all part of keeping a community active.

I'm beginning think my reversed Don Cherry crack was close to the mark - you are stubborn when you get on a track Now it's me shaking my head.   

You view "just a high school degree" - I saw you running a business at an age when the rest of us were asking for allowances.  
It's funny because I've often found the people most in awe of university are the ones who didn't attend.
I and others will tell you a lot of it is a big irresponsible social party and if you are lucky some of the "thinking patterns" of the better profs rub off.
You get the same "rub off" from your life experiences whether formal or not.
I'm sure you can identify people in your work experience who have acted as mentors and had influence on you.

If you are doubtful of me on this get Dr. Gs take on it.
I DO get seriously irritated when people denigrate their own skill sets and abilities.  Toes do get bitten then


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Toe biting? What the hell?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sharks, snick - where you've been on this thread anyway


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

A true academic friend asked me this:
"Why are the politics of academia so unsparingly vicious?"
I asked why.
"Because the stakes are so low."


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

macdoc said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Ummm where did I say patient and gracious and where did I say anything about abilities???* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
As you would say, read your post. You said, "...because we've been almost life-long friends you get a bit more time and low level needling. Part of this is to get your confidence in your own abilities up."

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*I'm beginning think my reversed Don Cherry crack was close to the mark - you are stubborn when you get on a track Now it's me shaking my head.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In my opinion, this has only gone on this long because you have constantly brought the discussion back around to intensity and style of debating and sidestepped the issue of decorum. But you're right, I don't give up the bone easily either.  

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *I DO get seriously irritated when people denigrate their own skill sets and abilities.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wasn't denigrating my own abilities, although I can be accused of undervaluating them. I was being facetious with the observation of your statement (see first quote reference above). I've never really been in "awe" of university. I had a short stint there and in my life's experiences I've discovered that some of the most clueless people I've met are highly educated in their field, but are hopeless with common sense problems. "Really smart but not too bright" might be a description. Those that have mastered both camps are blessed. Some of those reside here in ehMacland.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Blessed are the clueless, for they shall find shelter in any home.

Still, we are a participatory democracy here in ehMacLand, and we have a right and a responsibility to express our views in a forthright and civil manner.


----------



## VertiGoGo (Aug 21, 2001)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The topic starter expresses outrage over George Bush's invocation of a "GOD" (presumably looking favorably upon American interests) to order the largest and most lethal force of human violence ever known on this planet. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dunno...I can think of a few other incidents that are a little worse. Like THIS for example

Let us not forget the genocides that have happened in some African nations, either.

Food for thought.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

VertiGoGo

Thanks for keeping the flame lit. A timely reminder.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macello - thank you - terse and on the point as usual.

Peter
I still don't see anything about patient and gracious??

I haven't side stepped decorum I've explained a number of times I'm not adverse to responding in kind and it wasn't just me. Intensity and style is about decorum.

Thank you ..yes you can be accused of under valuing them - I did - you did - don't....that goes for everyone.

I detect some fire in the belly here...good.


----------



## MacDoxie (Mar 28, 2003)

Macdoc and VertiGoGo, in 1854, Kierkegaard wrote in his "Journal" that "The existence of a Christian is contact with Being." Regarding President Bush, as Kierdegaard might view him, he (i.e., Bush) must always see himself in the presence of God and "reintegrate into Christian thought" this notion of being in front of God. However, to see oneself before God is to see oneself as a sinner. Thus, it is by sin, and particularly by consciousness of sin, that one enters the religious life. In the highest state of religion, reason is scandalized, for we meet with the "affirmation of the incarnation" in the idea of the birth of the "eternal being" at a certain place and a certain moment in history. 

Possibly, President Bush is experiencing a "crucifixion of the understanding".


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

macdoc wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*Peter
I still don't see anything about patient and gracious??* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
When you said "...because we've been almost life-long friends you get a bit more time and low level needling.". I took that as self-congratulatory generosity for not beating up on me. Goes to show how what we mean and what we type can be misinterpreted.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*I haven't side stepped decorum I've explained a number of times I'm not adverse to responding in kind and it wasn't just me. Intensity and style is about decorum.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Once again (for the umpteenth time?), responding in kind is fine within the boundaries of decorum, as is style and intensity. Rudeness, insolence etc. don't belong. With all due respect, a reference to this exact item of concern has yet to be directly addressed in any of your replies other than the "respond in kind" declaration. You think Darryl started it, I don't. He made some angry; I wasn't one of them (nor were others). Some became insolent and obnoxious in their response; I dropped the flag. We obviously aren't in accord and participation is dwindling, so Iet's drop this. My point has been made and the issue has dissipated for now. It has been a pleasure. I'll get lost now for a while.









_Note to self:_ Don't be bitter, Peter; nobody likes a bitter peter.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

No one likes salt peter either.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yep fire in the belly  
ANYONE I know gets more low level needling - goes with the turf  

Even Michael got a salmon, species uncertain, winged his way today


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

And as I had posted on another thread, I love salmon. Please refrain from non-edible, smelly old salmon.

Nice fresh de-boned filets are most preferable.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Okay only the finest Chinook or Atlantic for you. Capers ..suh


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Atlantic de-boned salmon filet is great thanx. Got my own capers.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

macspectrum wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *No one likes salt peter either.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A spell and syntax checker would change that to "No one likes salt either, Peter"


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Peter S. edited:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> A spell and syntax checker would change that to "No one likes salt either, Peter" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I may be allowed to extrapolate;
"No one likes bitter salt peter either, Peter."


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Now if someone mentions oops







pickled peppers...... I'm firing the smelliest salmon in the arsenal at ALL of US -


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

What? You got something against plants in the squash familiy?

Bush sr. had his broccoli and david has his pumpkins (pickled peppers)

*edit - macdoc changed from pumpkins to pickled peppers....*

hmmmmmm


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

“Anyone likes butter better than bitter saltpeter, better than ether, better than either”, says Aretha’s son Peter (paraphrased from Dr. Zeuss)


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Peter S. mixed a mythology and children's icon cocktail:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Dr. Zeuss<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dr. Zeuss?
Is that Dr. Seuss's long lost Greek relative with the god complex?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

No Michael..there was never a "pumpkin" Michael, it's all in your mind Michael, it was always "pickled pepper" Michael, you wouldn't want to have to visit Room 101 again Michael...........


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I know what I saw and what I read.
Pumpkin, it was.
Room 101? That's Room 5 (base 10)


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>* Is that Dr. Seuss's long lost Greek relative with the god complex? *<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's the one! Very clever of you to pick up on the copyright dodge..or was it a typo?...no, it was certainly intentional...or was it? I he were Norse, I'll bet he'd be Thor with me.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Notice I quoted that time since MacDoc's little dodge of post facto editing.
We'll be watching you mister.
I must report this to my controller.


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

Peter Scharman..........blessed are the peacemakers. I appreciate both your yellow flag and the encouragement.
I have learned some interesting things from observing the dynamic of the Forum........it is a unique atmospere to operate in. It draws on your literary ability in ways I did not imagine. 
Dangerous, and stimulating, sometimes rough, and yet a study into the spirit of the age.
Please do not put yourself down for not enduring university. I have met many men who could barely read but had more wisdom than my professors.
These men had thoughts of their own and did not quote the great thoughts of others.
No amount of education can give you wisdom.
Lots of information out there to fill our minds, its like panning for gold, you have to screen out all the rocks and gravel.
You may or may not find gold.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I agree with you Darrel. There's sometimes a striking division between people who have wisdom (or common sense) and knowledge. I see other upper level students in some of my classes and around campus, knowing some of them get very high marks, and wonder how they even get dressed in the mornings. Do their parents still dress them every morning? . . . It makes me think of a girl who I worked with. She was very sweet and did well enough to get big scholarships from U of T but when it came to practical advice and wisdom she couldn't fill a thimble. I feel like a snob for saying so but it's true. And, in addition, she spoke like a Valley Girl ("so, like, whatever, you know..."). And she's 100% Canadian. Life's a weird thing. 

It seems that accumulation of knowledge and application of knowledge are not directly linked; they do, however, tend to be correlative. 

Thus endeth my tangential rant.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Information and knowledge and wisdom?? interesting topic- here's my own take.

Information > ingredients for the pie and baking times - easily obtained from a book

Knowledge> what a good pie should look and taste like when it's fit to eat - gained after ruining a few or many

Wisdom > knowing who gets a piece 

My dad was pretty good at all three and his formal education ended in grade 3.
He built his own house with $100 in the bank and still lives in it with his wife of 60 years.
Still drives and cuts down "big" trees at age 90 ( the doctor banned the 25' ladder 3 years ago after a dizzy spell  )
He's collected more from his Inco pension over the last 25 years than he earned in the 31 years he worked there!

And he makes a mean apple pie with maple syrup, yum thin sliced apples perfect crust...won the church contests every year he entered.... much to the dismay of a number of ladies.  

Dad's formal education > just about zero.
His success in life > just about 110%


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, "Dr. Zeuss"??? "Thor with me"!!! ROTFABABTDTIWALRL. I have selected my vaudevillian partner quite well, n'est pas?










 

(Rolling on the floor and being attacked by the doxies thinking I was a laughing rolling log)


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Dr G., I'm proud to say that it takes a warped and simple, yet evolved sense of humour to write and apprciate those kind of puns...... like your "give peas a chance" joke. If the rest don't appreciate them, then I say, "To hell with them!!" Just another difference of opinion


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

A good metaphor MacDoc.

The only problem is now I really want some apple pie. Say, if your father isn't doing anything next week and would like to make pie. . .


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, too bad we couldn't have had these back in the 60's!!!!! Imagine the fortune we could have made (and then given to charity) with







buttons. I still have all of my buttons from the 60's. My son wants them, but I told him to get his own generation.

What do we call the 00"s???

Great icon, oh IconMaster. I am a humble cricket in your shadow..........making noise but not being seen.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I agree with CC, a most profound analogy.

We should compile a collection of these sorts of statements and publish "The Philosophy of ehMacLanders".


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>*"The Philosophy of ehMacLanders".*
Or if they use laptops, "The Philosophy of ehMac Laplanders"  (my apologies...I'm just in that mood today)


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I have just spoken with your wife. Any minute now she will enter your workspace and announce to you "Time to 'rein' you in, 'dear'." You ARE in a creative mood today!!! Keep up the good work.

Of course, the Lappland Anti-defamation League will be paying you a "bit" of a visit shortly, as well. Wait until they can be 'herd' on your roof and then run out the front door.

Sorry, I am not in much of a creative mood these days.

We should really take this over to the Monster Thread and not steal the focus of this thread.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The salmon cannons are swivelling towards KW as we speak


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, I know that somewhere, deep within some thread, is the underlying explanation for the "salmon" throwing threats. However, might you tell me what all of these references to salmon actually mean???


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Fire away!! I've got the frying pans ready!
I'm done now, there's work to do and I'm in the wrong thread anyway. See you over there, Dr G.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ah the great salmon caper..... sorry Michael couldn't resist








Dr. G
In several threads people taken to task for a varity of minor faux pas ranging from horrible puns, to getting a bit heated in their exchanges have been threatened with deluges smelly decayed salmon carcasses. The worse the offense the smellier or higher quantity of flying fish carcasses are inferred.
You'd have to hunt back to figure where it started but it's a sort a verbal razzberry and of course the concept has been tossed, filletted, fried, rigged with high tech range finders, turned into a lunch line by Peter and Michael ad infinitum.
Since you've been a bit more vocal these days - a few "zingers" dare I say - it appeared that a new "salmon launching" facility was established in your fair city.
Perhaps it's your evil twin.  

Results: Even the mere threat of a salmon launch strikes hunger.....err terror....into perpetrators.  

I think you understand the use in managing dialogue.


----------



## iGeeK (Jan 27, 2003)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cynical Critic:
*
The only problem is now I really want some apple pie. Say, if your father isn't doing anything next week and would like to make pie. . .  *<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ditto.

After such a glowing pitch for MacDoc Dad's pie,
we ned someone wise to figure out how to get a slice to us all.

[Homerstyle] "Pieeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"

G/<


----------



## iGeeK (Jan 27, 2003)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dr.G.:
*
What do we call the 00"s???
*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Null Lull.

G/<


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Hmmm food seems to bring the lurkers out in droves. Perhaps we need a favorite food or favorite recipe thread...anyone care to start???


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Oh wise and powerful Macdoc, the Master of the MacMavens........your wish is my command. It has been done as you requested/suggested/demanded.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Dr. G I suspect the food thread will break all records.
Did you locate the St. Johns salmon launcher??  
I suspect you may be stealing a slice or two of the better specimens for your lox and bagel.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Back to the Business of Killing.

POX AMERICANA:
The Ultimate Military Cowardice.**

President Offers Pledge to Iraqis. 
Washington Post 
Tuesday, April 1, 2003 
"Day by day, we are moving closer to victory." 

"Everyone is now seen as a combatant until proven otherwise," a Pentagon official said. 

Tuesday April 1, 2003 
Najaf, Iraq
American soldiers shot dead seven women and children yesterday when their car failed to stop at a checkpoint in southern Iraq, US military officials said last night. 

Tuesday, 1 April, 2003 
Hilla, Iraq
At least 11 members of the same family - mostly children - have been killed in a coalition air strike on a residential district in central Iraq, western news reports say. 
Hospital sources in Hilla, about 80 kilometres (50 miles) south of Baghdad, said they were among 33 civilians killed and more than 300 injured in the attack early on Tuesday morning.

Do the brave shoot like this ?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, the launcher is ready, set up at Cape Spear, the furthest easterly point in North America. However, I shall not arm this "weapon" unless I am told of the significance of salmon. Nor shall I launch any bagels. From our estimates, we can land an Atlantic Salmon (freshly caught) into Macnutt's garden 97% of the time (in our first 100 trial shots, we hit the Empress Hotel in Victoria, the Golden Boy atop of the legislative dome in Winnipeg, and at the feet of Mel Lastman). All other attempts were right on target.

Thus, divulge this secret or lose out on St.John's other "weapon of mass mess making" (killer doxies being the first).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The smelly salmon launcher SSL is a weapon of mass putrefaction and should only be used as a strategic weapon to keep the "other guys" in line.
Carving of salmon steaks and fillets is frowned upon by the ABST treaty but allowed in times of dire snack attack.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, thank you for the clarification of the "great salmon caper". I guess that there is a "little boy or girl" in each of us, when we wish to act like children. Actually, kids fight and make up quickly. Sadly, countries don't.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Why do i get the impression that Dr. G. is writing a paper on all this?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

An interesting idea, macspectrum, but it is not currently on my "to do" list of things I would like to do re my research-agenda. I was just curious as to why all the salmon references.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Salmon...Re-iterating the comment I made to Peter it's not a kids thing - it's dialogue management allowing anyone who thinks another is a bit over the top etc to remind them in a humourous/odiferous manner.
Some of the UT guys had a similar "rubber fish" interplay on the go.
Last time I try and explain a joke  most don't stand analysis very well....you sort have to be there...anyway keep that east coast launcher loaded for those that dis NL or like MacDonald's or......

Michael you try......


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

David,
I suggest that you keep an explanation on file in a SimpleText document and then copy and paste whenever the need arises.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>*Salmon...Re-iterating the comment I made to Peter it's not a kids thing - it's dialogue management allowing anyone who thinks another is a bit over the top etc to remind them in a humourous/odiferous manner.
Some of the UT guys had a similar "rubber fish" interplay on the go.* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Really??? It's polite, in any case.  

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *I suggest that you keep an explanation on file in a SimpleText document and then copy and paste whenever the need arises. * <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are people with G4, mega gigaHz CPUs allowed to use such small , stripped down and memory efficient applications that run well on an LC??


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

macdoc, "Ready? Ay, ready!"


----------



## Darrell Rhodes (Feb 26, 2003)

This string has begun to smell a little fishy


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Only fish that has begun to spoil smells fishy.
Good, fresh fish does not smell fishy.
Matha Stewart - eat your heart out baby !!!


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *Matha Stewart - eat your heart out baby !!! 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sure she already has


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"macdoc, "Ready? Ay, ready!"

Macnutt the east coast arsenal is at the ready and we suspect Dr. Gs evil twin has BOTH launch keys!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Peter S. emoted:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matha Stewart - eat your heart out baby !!! 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sure she already has <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, in Martha-speak, would that be "a good thing"?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I've been away and silent for several days...but I still seem to be in the crosshairs of the dreaded salmon cannon!







  

Conversely...two days ago, I caught a pretty nice salmon and we had cooked it and eaten it within the hour. It was still kickin when it hit the grill!

Darn tasty...especially when served with the oysters we had just collected from the beach and the dungeness crab that we pulled up in the crabtrap. Life is soooo tough out here...   


BTW...what was this thread originally about, anyway?

(BTW...macdoc...I particularly liked your analogy about "wisdom" from a few pages back. I bet your dad's quite a guy.  )


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> *BTW...what was this thread originally about, anyway?* <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Does it really matter anymore?? It was about macdoc getting all excited about George Bush







, a misquote, and a beating of Darrell with frozen salmon (with the hooks still in), so it really didn't go to far before we blew the tires out from under it. It makes for good reading though.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

macdoc, I have been able to get craM to exchange the two launch keys for two doxie dog toys. He likes them, the doxies like to play with him and the toys, so everyone is happy. Now I have both keys..........thus I am in control. Do not try to adjust your volume.........we control the horizontal...we control the vertical. For the next hour sit back and watch........wait for it........live on our stage.....................direct from Las Vegas....................via the Big Apple.......................it's the .....


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Dr. G.,
Check your "." key on your computer keyboard. It seems stuck.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Perhaps he's got a doxie wedged in it.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

doxie wedgie? that would hurt


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

You or the dog?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"groan ......smelly salmon whacks to you all and to all a good night '


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

(in Homer Simpson's voice)

MMMMM...salmon wedgie...squishy.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

To quote the immortal words of Dr. Seuss on this matter: "One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish..."

I wonder if Dr. Seuss really had a PhD what it would be in. Funology? Rhymology?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sick...........sick...........sick.......and more sick. How I wish I could post just one picture of Rootie or Daisy as a pup. One look at those sad doxie eyes, begging you not to be angry with them............or to eat them for lunch, and you would stop all this "doxie bashing".


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Who's bashing dogs??! Not me!!

I prefer to smother them slowly with a large pillow. It makes the meat taste better.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

Smothering, bashing poor little doggies. Eck.

On the other hand, if it's a runty little yappy dog with a stupid hair cut they do rate highly on the _puntability_ meter. Although that does seem cruel. Maybe I should change my ways and transfer the bad hair cut or stupid accessories from the _puntability_ meter to the _smack-the-owner-with-a-large-fish_ meter. I think I've seen the light! No need to worry: the doxies are safe from me; however, if you give them anything akin to a poodle cut or silly bows and ribbons beware the fast and furious flying fish of judgement, Dr G.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Let's see, people to keep off "The List" -- Peter, jeac5, CC, MacDoxie, lotus, Kosh, and ..........................................???

"The List" gets you off the waiting list for "Room 101" and up to the front of the line. It is a two-tier situation for "medicatl care".


----------



## lotus (Jun 29, 2002)

Gee thanks!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

lotus, you have earned the trust and loyalty of the Dynamic Doxie Duo, thus, you are one of the "chosen ones". For the others, they may have to beware the Fantastic and Fictional Furious Flying fish of Fate Multi-functional Launcher.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

Yes, I imagine I'm not alone is my knowledge of the deadly and seductive fish-slapping dance. I believe the dance originates from one Mr. Monty Python of the U.K. Further information of its origins is sketchy at best.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

How would you like to be slapped with this fella??!!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Sorry Peter...that particular icon didn't come through.  

BTW...the written part did, though. Sounds like a line from an old porn movie..._yikes_


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I'm glad there was supposed to be an icon and that I'm not alone in imagining Peter's line as one from a porn flic.

My reply: just keep "it" to yourself, Peter!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Great minds think alike CC.  

Say...you don't suppose that occurred to both of us because we are from the same twisted little island, do you?  

Double _yikes!_


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

I can see the icon; can't you see it? Browser issue?? I'm on IE 5.1


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I can't either Pete


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

no see icon
me on mac os 9.2.2, IE 5.1.6

tried on OS X.2.4 
no see icon either


----------



## lotus (Jun 29, 2002)

Icon? What icon?? Peter must be over in Shangri-la.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Peter,
is it possible that gif won't load 'cause the server you are using limits file names to 8 characters plus extension??


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Me still can see the icon.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I'm on OSX.2 plus all the updates...which means I am currently using IE 5.2. I think.









No icon. Just a line from a porn movie.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

peter,
where is the location of the icon?
on your computer?
on a ftp/http site hosted by someone else?
could explain some of the issues


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

hell,
just email me the icon and i'll post it, making sure that all can see it.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Oh-oh! I just lost it now as well. It was an image from another web site. I guess I was more priviledged than most in being able to view it up till now. It's not a big deal....it was a large image of a very ugly fish...the kind you wouldn't want launched at you by the local "artilery challenged" members.


----------



## Cynical Critic (Sep 2, 2002)

I have have Safari and IE 5.2, which I am phasing out. The icon or image does not appear on either. Maybe you've been inhaling too many fish fumes or maybe you've been slapped too many times by this rather large fish.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Peter discovered:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Oh-oh! I just lost it now as well <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looks like someone finally re-freshed their browser cache.


----------

