For the record Bob



[ Interesting  about the old gnostic way of thinking too. Them old
fellows that likely disliked  the early Christians more than Sir Richard
does ;-)   ]



I do not dislike early christians, or modern ones, or anyone else for
that matter, what I do detest and abhore is what is done to them for
vested  interest and power motives, and the fact that they let it be
done to them; like  slaves on a treadmill. There is nothing easier, more
simple and more natural,  than to simply go through life observing
things, thinking about them, wondering  about it all, asking oneself
questions, feeling all the joys and the pains, and  simply letting the
whole thing pan out and unfold in a natural way and to do  what it does
and to reveal what it has to reveal to us. It works. It is not  clever,
smart, it is just the most natural of all things and all the ways to
live.  Life reveals things to us  spontaneously without our having to
ask for them. Unless one closes oneself down  to it all.



But to walk on the two crutches of Belief and Disbelief (same thing in
effect) is to erect a barrier to what life can and cannot reveal to us.
You must  know very well that so many people have bordered in the brink
of transition and  told themselves that this is wrong, not right, not
supposed to happen, because  they have been told as to what is right and
what is wrong, and what is supposed  to be real and what is not real,
etc.  So  this ingrained fear holds them back, like being tied to a rock
by a captive  chain of their own making.  It does seem  to me from
hindsight that breaking that chain is far more difficult than never
letting it be put there in the first place. So, it is not the captive
prisoner  that I hate and abhore, it is the chain that binds them. A
chain forged in the  furnace of the love of power. A power that not only
corrupts the perpetrator but  also enslaves the victim by the power of
fear.



Throughout the millennia it has become the accepted paradigm that one
must believe something. But that is the chain which binds. There is
nothing more  natural, even as a child, than to simply realise that one
is here, existing, and  then to wonder what it is all about and what
existing has to offer us and reveal  to us, and as to what we can do
about it all, and what we can become. Just as  defining something in
absolute terms can restrict a thing then so too does  ingrained dogma
about what is right and wrong and what is real or not real,  restrict
one and ties one there. And not even to mention that things in time are
changing and evolving all the time anyway, and changing, BECOMING.  What
was true about human beings fifty  thousand years ago is not true today,
it has changed, evolved, moved on; it has  become more than what it was
on earth. The process of unfolding has not stopped.



But it is only on looking into things deeper that one finds what it is
that changes in Time but which remains constant in its essential form in
eternity. And one cannot find that if one is restricted and tied to the
rock of  Time due to entropic beliefs or disbeliefs and fear. Be
curious, wonder, seek,  ask questions, and let it do its work. It DOES
work. But, now, saying this, is  like whistling into the wind, and they
don't hear because they have pulled down  a curtain on it all, like
turning a tap off so that the water cannot flow  through them. What can
be done about this? Well, only they can do it and turn  the tap back on
again; and open up to WHAT IS there to be had, experienced,  known, and
loved. THAT is the problem.



I was perhaps foolish enough, hopeful enough, naive enough, to think
that  if this restriction can be put there by other people (which it is)
then so too  should it be able to be undone by other people. But it
seems like I was wrong.  But that which Time cannot undo then Eternity
does. And that is a fact. I told  them once that one day they will meet
their self coming the other way, and they  all laughed. Well, they will;
and they will not be laughing then. I can but say,  wait and see. But
even that is no consolation, for it is needed here and now –  not in
Eternity. One day they will know what I am talking about. But not yet.
They all want illumination; but they don't want to be illuminated,
and they fear  that event – because they have to go through a very
dark place, alone, to get  there.  Fear binds them to the rock of
ignorance and unknowing. The dark cloud of unknowing. That we can and do
surpass  it is not something that they want to hear; and that will have
its own  repercussions.



rwr







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Irvin,  Mary,

I am interested to read what you both have to say on this subject. It is
something I reflect on quite a bit.

I agree that we form dispositions to react in certain ways – no doubt these
dispositions are partly determined by our genetic makeup, and partly determined
by our upbringing and our cultural situation.

However, we can monitor our own thoughts, feelings and behaviour, and we can
reflect on our instinctive or habitual ways of behaving, and we can override
them with conscious attention and determined effort.

Some alcoholics do stop drinking and some of us change our behaviour as we get
older as we see the consequences of our thoughtless actions. No doubt the
determinist will say such changes are fully determined by the causal laws of the
physical world and any thought that we are acting freely is pure delusion and
self-deception. However, I do not think that the subjective experience that we
are determining the course of our own lives can be dismissed so easily.

I agree that some – most – of the time I react spontaneously ("on auto-pilot")
to what comes my way, but on the big decisions I deliberate for hours, days,
years and here I coolly examine my own reasons as well as the possible outcomes
of my actions. These big decisions do seem to me to be based on reason and not
knee-jerk instinctive dispositions.

Agreed we do not know for sure if we are acting freely or if our actions are
fully determined in a non-personal way. But given the uncertainty, we still must
act on a particular conception of the self. I think that the conception of
myself as a free individual, responsible for my own actions, is the only
conception which preserves any meaning to human existence.

Jim

If polls are correct, tomorrow Rand Paul should be elected senator from
Kentucky. Much has been marshalled to stop him -- revelations that as a young
student he liked Nietzsche; that he's received, though it's a relative pittance,
donations from "white separatists"; and even claims of condoning violence
against women after his security detail took down an itinerant female leftist
that accosted him before a debate. Though loathed by urban cosmopolitans, he
enthralls our Scot-Irish rural folk. He condemns the unfettered Latino invasion
as incompatible with a welfare state (and sub silentio our culture) and attacks
run-a-way budgets. Dwelling with one's folk is home. Language, said Heidegger,
is the house of being. Paul speaks to my kith and kin, and we hear.

Irvin

He sounds a horrible individual - let's hope he loses.
Jim

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@...> wrote:
>
> If polls are correct, tomorrow Rand Paul should be elected senator from
Kentucky. Much has been marshalled to stop him -- revelations that as a young
student he liked Nietzsche; that he's received, though it's a relative pittance,
donations from "white separatists"; and even claims of condoning violence
against women after his security detail took down an itinerant female leftist
that accosted him before a debate. Though loathed by urban cosmopolitans, he
enthralls our Scot-Irish rural folk. He condemns the unfettered Latino invasion
as incompatible with a welfare state (and sub silentio our culture) and attacks
run-a-way budgets. Dwelling with one's folk is home. Language, said Heidegger,
is the house of being. Paul speaks to my kith and kin, and we hear.
>
> Irvin
>

How do Mystics see Life and Death?



[ … so how then do mystics see life and death? ]



If you mean how do they understand it then I can only speak for myself,
not mystics; let them speak for themselves. As for me then I see it from
two points of reference; one being the me here in time and space and the
other being from the ME that does not exist in time and space. Or the i
am and the I AM parts of me. Also, I can only see it and understand it
from the sum of observations, direct experience, plus the message of the
implications of those direct experiences. It reveals that the i am dies
but that the I AM is never terminated.



Thus I see it and understand it in the same way that I see and
understand a Daffodil. In the winter there is nothing there to be seen
or known above ground, it is gone; is no more. But below ground there is
the seed, and it does not die.  In the spring a green shoot emanates
forth from the seed and sticks its head above the ground (waves of space
and Time) and it is alive on the world. It then comes to full flower,
and then withers and dies, and the force goes back into the seed below
the ground; or dead to the world; cold storage; hibernation; unseen by
the world and space and time.   Known only unto Eternity and the I AM me
part of our being.



Next year another flower will bloom and do its thing. It will not be the
same flower as last year or the same flower as next year; different
flowers – from the same seed. I AM the seed of ME. You cannot return
to below the ground other than by way of me. I AM the way. And Eternity
and I are one.



As for the sum of all LIFE (not just me) then the same applies. But the
sum of all life is from a ground deeper than that ground. And there I
cannot go. So it remains a mystery. But it is a mystery that works, for
here I AM to prove it. I see only what I find.  Death cannot be known,
for LIFE cannot go there. Wherever I go then there I AM, alive and
knowing it. That is how I found it. You speak of what you have found
thus far. But the Man has been a green boy and moved on. Where are all
the blooms? Realise your Birth Day; Redeem your Birth Day; but don't
stay there. It is yours for the knowing and the remembering. Then move
on. Fearing nothing at all. It is not fear that makes you bloom.



rwr





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree with you, Jim. Politics is where our personal philosophy intersects with
public life. I will vote to keep Rand Paul et al and their philosophy at bay.
I'm so grateful that my absentee father made the right choice and left Kentucky
when he was a young man. The Paul Rands of the world have nothing in common with
the common man. They only want their votes. The Voter Participation Center
flattered me recently, so maybe Zizek is right, and the system wants me to
participate and perpetuate. I can't do nothing. Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> He sounds a horrible individual - let's hope he loses.
> Jim
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
> >
> > If polls are correct, tomorrow Rand Paul should be elected senator from
Kentucky. Much has been marshalled to stop him -- revelations that as a young
student he liked Nietzsche; that he's received, though it's a relative pittance,
donations from "white separatists"; and even claims of condoning violence
against women after his security detail took down an itinerant female leftist
that accosted him before a debate. Though loathed by urban cosmopolitans, he
enthralls our Scot-Irish rural folk. He condemns the unfettered Latino invasion
as incompatible with a welfare state (and sub silentio our culture) and attacks
run-a-way budgets. Dwelling with one's folk is home. Language, said Heidegger,
is the house of being. Paul speaks to my kith and kin, and we hear.
> >
> > Irvin
> >
>

Which way will the USA go in the next fifty  years.



Will it go down the road of the Tea Party right  wing extremist
fundamentalism and isolationism ideal, or will go do down the  road of a
more liberal and world wide integrated community working for the
betterment of all in a more egalitarian world, or will it go down some
other  road?



Given that politics is the highest form of spirituality on earth, it
certainly makes one curious.  I cannot  say with a personal interest for
I will not be here in fifty years time, either  to rejoice in any human
advancement or to wallow in the tears of a complete  social cock-up. But
many young people alive today will be, and so too will those  yet to be
born. What sort of a world do you want for them, and how best to
achieve it?



I certainly can envisage the eight hundred million Europeans becoming
more aligned as one social unit by that time, and even with its own army
if  needs must. One of the smaller continents it certainly is, but over
the last two  millennia it has played a big role in shaping the world.
Upon which continent  will that task next rest? The one with the most
land? The one with the most  people?  The one with the most bombs? The
one with the most effective ideas and generally acceptable ideals?  What
is plain right now is that the world of  Mankind is reaching a tipping
point of catalytic crunch time, and exacerbated  by, if not prompted by,
declining resources and growing population. Only so many  people can eat
a cake. The answer is OUT THERE SOMEWHERE and the resolution and  effort
to it is IN HERE SOMEWHERE.



Whichever; make a world that my great great grandchildren will be happy
and proud to live on. If not then there will be revolution in a big way.
Probably a bloody one at that. If Man cannot work out how to do that,
and then  bring it into effect, then Man is dead head and waste of time
and  space.



Dick Richardson ( Democratic Republican Socialist )







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jim,

Election day is a busy day for me, but here are a few quick thoughts. I think
reason and emotion are entangled, and that for each person who is diligent in
their decision making, another person isn't. Is this the issue? While some of
are agonizing over important decisions, others react simply in a
straightforward, automatic manner, such as in the manner Irvin mentions. We talk
about a self which is totally preoccupied with others, no matter the
relationship, hostile or considerate, because others determine our state of
being. This is only human. So whether we think we're reasoning by and in
ourselves, or whether anyone else is doing likewise, we're stuck with this
absurdism: we're each in this together. This is the limit Camus recognized.

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> Irvin,  Mary,
>
> I am interested to read what you both have to say on this subject. It is
something I reflect on quite a bit.
>
> I agree that we form dispositions to react in certain ways – no doubt these
dispositions are partly determined by our genetic makeup, and partly determined
by our upbringing and our cultural situation.
>
> However, we can monitor our own thoughts, feelings and behaviour, and we can
reflect on our instinctive or habitual ways of behaving, and we can override
them with conscious attention and determined effort.
>
> Some alcoholics do stop drinking and some of us change our behaviour as we get
older as we see the consequences of our thoughtless actions. No doubt the
determinist will say such changes are fully determined by the causal laws of the
physical world and any thought that we are acting freely is pure delusion and
self-deception. However, I do not think that the subjective experience that we
are determining the course of our own lives can be dismissed so easily.
>
> I agree that some – most – of the time I react spontaneously ("on auto-pilot")
to what comes my way, but on the big decisions I deliberate for hours, days,
years and here I coolly examine my own reasons as well as the possible outcomes
of my actions. These big decisions do seem to me to be based on reason and not
knee-jerk instinctive dispositions.
>
> Agreed we do not know for sure if we are acting freely or if our actions are
fully determined in a non-personal way. But given the uncertainty, we still must
act on a particular conception of the self. I think that the conception of
myself as a free individual, responsible for my own actions, is the only
conception which preserves any meaning to human existence.
>
> Jim
>

Mary,

Thanks for your reply.

I agree that reason and emotion are entangled in all of us. And I also agree
that some of us agonize over important decisions whilst others make their minds
up straight away.

I don't think emotion is necessarily opposed to reason. The ideal situation is
when our emotions and our reason are in harmony – when we both want to do what
we decide is the reasonable thing to do. That is when what the heart says is the
same as what the head says.

Irvin in the past has referred to Aristotle who talked about training ourselves
to do the virtuous thing automatically. Rather like learning to drive a car, we
practice so the correct actions which first require great effort later become
automatic and second nature.

Another example: Think of the angry young man who decides to accept the offer of
a place on an anger-management course. He makes the conscious, free, decision to
go on the course, and, as a result, his emotional responses are modified.

Of course there are positive, beneficial emotions like love and sympathy and
there are negative harmful emotions like aggression.

I wouldn't say hate or anger were necessarily negative emotions, as sometimes
hatred and anger are the appropriate emotions to have. If I see bullying or
wanton cruelty, I ought to be angry about this, and perhaps it is appropriate to
feel hatred towards the perpetrators.

I agree it is only human to be preoccupied with others, especially as we all
live inter-dependent lives.

I have been reading and discussing certain eastern ideas recently, and these
include the idea that it is good to step back a little and be less attached to
other people and material things. I haven't made my mind up about this yet, but
I do think that some quiet time away from others for calm reflection on our
lives and our situations is a good thing.

Jim

Jim,

What I admit to enjoying about philosophers, most recently Bohm and Zizek, is
how they challenge the clichι and ordinary. Bohm thinks that thought is a
complex system and as we develop throughout childhood, we actually adopt
thoughts which bring pleasure, i.e. acceptance. He maintains that emotion and
thinking are never separate, rather we experience a feedback loop. Zizek writes
about hate as a form of love, an extraordinary response to systemic rather than
overt acts of violence such as bullying. In this case, it seems one could hate
someone, because we are so very hurt by their lack of insight, self-awareness,
etc., and want much more from them. He applies this to a nation or
socio-political system. It sounds off the track, but if you realize that by
getting to the root of issues and being brutally honest, everyone is in the
position of having to make important decisions, not just ourselves. To expect
less than the best of people is condescending though seemingly tolerant. To
settle for less is the kind of cowardice radical thinkers condemn. We live
between all out conflict and total withdrawal, and compromise seems prudent, but
I wonder if Zizek is right in believing nothing will change this way. Slow and
easy, or fast and painful?

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> Mary,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I agree that reason and emotion are entangled in all of us. And I also agree
that some of us agonize over important decisions whilst others make their minds
up straight away.
>
> I don't think emotion is necessarily opposed to reason. The ideal situation is
when our emotions and our reason are in harmony – when we both want to do what
we decide is the reasonable thing to do. That is when what the heart says is the
same as what the head says.
>
> Irvin in the past has referred to Aristotle who talked about training
ourselves to do the virtuous thing automatically. Rather like learning to drive
a car, we practice so the correct actions which first require great effort later
become automatic and second nature.
>
> Another example: Think of the angry young man who decides to accept the offer
of a place on an anger-management course. He makes the conscious, free, decision
to go on the course, and, as a result, his emotional responses are modified.
>
> Of course there are positive, beneficial emotions like love and sympathy and
there are negative harmful emotions like aggression.
>
> I wouldn't say hate or anger were necessarily negative emotions, as sometimes
hatred and anger are the appropriate emotions to have. If I see bullying or
wanton cruelty, I ought to be angry about this, and perhaps it is appropriate to
feel hatred towards the perpetrators.
>
> I agree it is only human to be preoccupied with others, especially as we all
live inter-dependent lives.
>
> I have been reading and discussing certain eastern ideas recently, and these
include the idea that it is good to step back a little and be less attached to
other people and material things. I haven't made my mind up about this yet, but
I do think that some quiet time away from others for calm reflection on our
lives and our situations is a good thing.
>
> Jim
>

A narrative of the mysterious, primordial and eternal, knowledge and
understanding which resides in the very central heart of our being; and
which is always there to be found, and thence restored again, redeemed
in the awareness of the daily rational discursive mind of Man; and we
then again know what we are and where we come from. But to acquire this
during a lifetime then ones consciousness has to make that journey alone
through the darkness and across the proverbial River Styx to the far
shore and back into the primordial Ground of our Being. This is not a
religion or a belief but simply an affirmation of what is and what
happens and what it reveals; and then the effects of knowing it and
living from it; and where it goes from there. It is not for believing;
it is for knowing by your own personal first hand experience.



When knowing it then you too will say: Once upon a time there was a time
when time did not move, and nought else but I was brought forth from the
depths of non existence into existence, and I was there. Therefore I
will give you that which no ear has heard and which no hand has touched;
that which no imagination could work out and that which has never
occurred to the rational discursive mind until it has once again
redeemed the knowledge of what it is. So it always was; so it is now;
and so it will always be.



Psychognosis means the Knowledge of ones SELF in the Ground of Being.



http://www.psychognosis.net/ <http://www.psychognosis.net/>



http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychognosis/
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychognosis/>



http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychognosis_Archive/
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychognosis_Archive/>



   rwr





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have been at
low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political wars are
off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not much up
for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and begin
their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that would
be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we hand
them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world  full of  hot wars 
and huge ideological strife. We took communism down  and and though Islam is a
threat there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our
new,prime generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country
in a more peaceful environment.
As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I noted a
great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as  my generation is mostly
spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and energy
runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of  Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism  plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill

Bill

Of course, it is hard to guess what any politician will do. If Rand follows a
similar pattern as his dad, I will be delighted.His dad has the nickname "Dr No"
because he is a MD and votes no on the vast majority of bills that come up.I've
heard many times, he has voted no to 400 hunded something yeses. Interestingly,
on war and civil liberties, Dr Paul has often worked with liberal Democrats like
Kucinich and Frank. Libertarians as well as some of your more idealistic
liberals  tend to oppose the mideast wars that have gone on for over 9 years
now, as well as the civil liberties encroached on by the war on terror. They
likewise are all enemies of the war on drugs. Libertarians tend to believe that
government on all levels has a tendency to become primarily involved in
perpetuating itself and being a servant of special interests with money. To me
certainly the military industrial complex as well as the police state prison
industrial complex are certainly the two huge areas that not only spend hundreds
of billions of money the government must borrow, but also are involved in
causing deaths, injuries, and unnecesary disruptions of people's lives. Just as
the forces that beat prop 19 in California through various means convinced the
majority of voters to reject it, the forces that support continuous warfare are
always active in making us think that spending hundreds of billions more dollars
to make more missiles, more navy landing boars, build more military bases around
the world, and place more troops around the world is making us more secure. For
over 40 years, there was a cold war in which two monsters faced off with one
another. It was a similar scenario as when Tyson faced Lennox Lewis about 9 or
10 years ago, and got his ass beat. So that was the scenario for US military
expansion for over 40 years. But now there are no Lennox Lewis to beat Tyson.
The US stands to the rest of the world as Tyson to us in terms of being able to
kick ass. Beefing up Tyson to the Great Hulk is unnecesary, and since it
intensifies the resentments of the world toward the US as a huge monster that
can only be dealt with by heroic self sacraficing martrdom. Ron Paul said he'd
like to see US troops withdrawn from all over the world. No one else has that
many troops around the world. I know the US accounts for almost 50% of world
military spending; and I'll bet they account for more than half of troops on
foreign soil. THe military actions performed by the US in the last 9 years in my
opinion have not made us more secure. Unless you are going to kill every one of
a billion Muslims, killing hundeds of thousands and wounding hundreds of
thousands more influences tens of millions of young men in the direction of
terrorism. There is an Islamic code wherein any male over a certain age has a
moral obligation to avenge wrongs done to their family, and in the last 9 years
as the Wikileaks reveals, much wrongs have been done including torturing,raping
etc.hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed, businesses and farms
blown up etc.

If a small fraction of the money spent on defense was invested in learning from
Switzerland how to remain neutral and have peace, it would be nice.It has been
almost 200 years since Switzerland was involved in an international conflict.

So I am strongly in favor of avoiding interventionist wars and prosecuting
victimless crime, and favor individuals or groups like libertarians on the right
or George Soros forces on the left that tend to oppose the mideast wars and the
drug war at home.

Peace and best luck to all people of good will

Tom
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: William
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:18 PM
   Subject: [existlist] Less tumult



   I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have been at
low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political wars are
off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not much up
for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and begin
their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that would
be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we hand
them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world full of hot wars and
huge ideological strife. We took communism down and and though Islam is a threat
there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our new,prime
generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country in a more
peaceful environment.
   As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I noted
a great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as my generation is mostly
spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and energy
runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
>
> Bill
>
> Of course, it is hard to guess what any politician will do. If Rand follows a
similar pattern as his dad, I will be delighted.His dad has the nickname "Dr No"
because he is a MD and votes no on the vast majority of bills that come up.I've
heard many times, he has voted no to 400 hunded something yeses. Interestingly,
on war and civil liberties, Dr Paul has often worked with liberal Democrats like
Kucinich and Frank. Libertarians as well as some of your more idealistic
liberals  tend to oppose the mideast wars that have gone on for over 9 years
now, as well as the civil liberties encroached on by the war on terror. They
likewise are all enemies of the war on drugs. Libertarians tend to believe that
government on all levels has a tendency to become primarily involved in
perpetuating itself and being a servant of special interests with money. To me
certainly the military industrial complex as well as the police state prison
industrial complex are certainly the two huge areas that not only spend hundreds
of billions of money the government must borrow, but also are involved in
causing deaths, injuries, and unnecesary disruptions of people's lives. Just as
the forces that beat prop 19 in California through various means convinced the
majority of voters to reject it, the forces that support continuous warfare are
always active in making us think that spending hundreds of billions more dollars
to make more missiles, more navy landing boars, build more military bases around
the world, and place more troops around the world is making us more secure. For
over 40 years, there was a cold war in which two monsters faced off with one
another. It was a similar scenario as when Tyson faced Lennox Lewis about 9 or
10 years ago, and got his ass beat. So that was the scenario for US military
expansion for over 40 years. But now there are no Lennox Lewis to beat Tyson.
The US stands to the rest of the world as Tyson to us in terms of being able to
kick ass. Beefing up Tyson to the Great Hulk is unnecesary, and since it
intensifies the resentments of the world toward the US as a huge monster that
can only be dealt with by heroic self sacraficing martrdom. Ron Paul said he'd
like to see US troops withdrawn from all over the world. No one else has that
many troops around the world. I know the US accounts for almost 50% of world
military spending; and I'll bet they account for more than half of troops on
foreign soil. THe military actions performed by the US in the last 9 years in my
opinion have not made us more secure. Unless you are going to kill every one of
a billion Muslims, killing hundeds of thousands and wounding hundreds of
thousands more influences tens of millions of young men in the direction of
terrorism. There is an Islamic code wherein any male over a certain age has a
moral obligation to avenge wrongs done to their family, and in the last 9 years
as the Wikileaks reveals, much wrongs have been done including torturing,raping
etc.hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed, businesses and farms
blown up etc.
>
> If a small fraction of the money spent on defense was invested in learning
from Switzerland how to remain neutral and have peace, it would be nice.It has
been almost 200 years since Switzerland was involved in an international
conflict.
>
> So I am strongly in favor of avoiding interventionist wars and prosecuting
victimless crime, and favor individuals or groups like libertarians on the right
or George Soros forces on the left that tend to oppose the mideast wars and the
drug war at home.
>
> Peace and best luck to all people of good will
>
> Tom
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: William
>   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:18 PM
>   Subject: [existlist] Less tumult
> Tom, Thank you for that frank response. Some years back I was  still in the
milatary and staying in a Swiss Hotel. The owner was an equil rank Swiss
Officer.He always pushed me for information  and toled me with pride that his
country could be closed and sealed by closing strategic passes in a very short
time. He asked me what I would do if that were done. I told him we could nuke
their cities and but chemical biologicals on their mountains. Since I knew the
Swiss boasted twenty years survival rations for the entire population, I told
him the half life of the bugs was twenty five years. Of course the lesson is you
cant run from a super power and after he considered it all he thanked me and we
were friends. I know we are stronger now than we were then. To have such a
pitiable giant run from an agrarian communist China, or be bullied by a disarmed
and bankrupt Europe should not happen. The whole attention will turn domestic
and Hillary becomes our Ranger, we could noy be better armed. Bill
>
>
>   I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have been
at low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political wars
are off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not much
up for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and begin
their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that would
be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we hand
them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world full of hot wars and
huge ideological strife. We took communism down and and though Islam is a threat
there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our new,prime
generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country in a more
peaceful environment.
>   As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I
noted a great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as my generation is
mostly spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and
energy runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
>
> Bill
>
> Of course, it is hard to guess what any politician will do. If Rand follows a
similar pattern as his dad, I will be delighted.His dad has the nickname "Dr No"
because he is a MD and votes no on the vast majority of bills that come up.I've
heard many times, he has voted no to 400 hunded something yeses. Interestingly,
on war and civil liberties, Dr Paul has often worked with liberal Democrats like
Kucinich and Frank. Libertarians as well as some of your more idealistic
liberals  tend to oppose the mideast wars that have gone on for over 9 years
now, as well as the civil liberties encroached on by the war on terror. They
likewise are all enemies of the war on drugs. Libertarians tend to believe that
government on all levels has a tendency to become primarily involved in
perpetuating itself and being a servant of special interests with money. To me
certainly the military industrial complex as well as the police state prison
industrial complex are certainly the two huge areas that not only spend hundreds
of billions of money the government must borrow, but also are involved in
causing deaths, injuries, and unnecesary disruptions of people's lives. Just as
the forces that beat prop 19 in California through various means convinced the
majority of voters to reject it, the forces that support continuous warfare are
always active in making us think that spending hundreds of billions more dollars
to make more missiles, more navy landing boars, build more military bases around
the world, and place more troops around the world is making us more secure. For
over 40 years, there was a cold war in which two monsters faced off with one
another. It was a similar scenario as when Tyson faced Lennox Lewis about 9 or
10 years ago, and got his ass beat. So that was the scenario for US military
expansion for over 40 years. But now there are no Lennox Lewis to beat Tyson.
The US stands to the rest of the world as Tyson to us in terms of being able to
kick ass. Beefing up Tyson to the Great Hulk is unnecesary, and since it
intensifies the resentments of the world toward the US as a huge monster that
can only be dealt with by heroic self sacraficing martrdom. Ron Paul said he'd
like to see US troops withdrawn from all over the world. No one else has that
many troops around the world. I know the US accounts for almost 50% of world
military spending; and I'll bet they account for more than half of troops on
foreign soil. THe military actions performed by the US in the last 9 years in my
opinion have not made us more secure. Unless you are going to kill every one of
a billion Muslims, killing hundeds of thousands and wounding hundreds of
thousands more influences tens of millions of young men in the direction of
terrorism. There is an Islamic code wherein any male over a certain age has a
moral obligation to avenge wrongs done to their family, and in the last 9 years
as the Wikileaks reveals, much wrongs have been done including torturing,raping
etc.hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed, businesses and farms
blown up etc.
>
> If a small fraction of the money spent on defense was invested in learning
from Switzerland how to remain neutral and have peace, it would be nice.It has
been almost 200 years since Switzerland was involved in an international
conflict.
>
> So I am strongly in favor of avoiding interventionist wars and prosecuting
victimless crime, and favor individuals or groups like libertarians on the right
or George Soros forces on the left that tend to oppose the mideast wars and the
drug war at home.
>
> Peace and best luck to all people of good will
>
> Tom
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: William
>   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:18 PM
>   Subject: [existlist] Less tumult
> Tom, Thank you for that frank response. Some years back I was  still in the
milatary and staying in a Swiss Hotel. The owner was an equil rank Swiss
Officer.He always pushed me for information  and toled me with pride that his
country could be closed and sealed by closing strategic passes in a very short
time. He asked me what I would do if that were done. I told him we could nuke
their cities and but chemical biologicals on their mountains. Since I knew the
Swiss boasted twenty years survival rations for the entire population, I told
him the half life of the bugs was twenty five years. Of course the lesson is you
cant run from a super power and after he considered it all he thanked me and we
were friends. I know we are stronger now than we were then. To have such a
pitiable giant run from an agrarian communist China, or be bullied by a disarmed
and bankrupt Europe should not happen. The whole attention will turn domestic
and Hillary becomes our Ranger, we could noy be better armed. Bill
>
>
>   I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have been
at low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political wars
are off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not much
up for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and begin
their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that would
be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we hand
them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world full of hot wars and
huge ideological strife. We took communism down and and though Islam is a threat
there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our new,prime
generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country in a more
peaceful environment.
>   As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I
noted a great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as my generation is
mostly spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and
energy runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I don't think the US being bullied is a very strong probability. World opinion
of the US has decreased greatly since the turn of the century. With the cold
war, the USSR was seen by the world in such a negative light, that the US having
a huge military budget, with troops around the world, and the CIA arranging
coues was perceived by the world as necesary to prevent USSR expansion. But with
the ending of the USSR, the global presence and huge military budget of the US,
and current involvement with two wars in the mideast resulted in the US being
perceived in increasingly negative terms.World opinion  of the US has  improved
under Obama,but as long as the US has troops all over the world, a bigger
military budget than all its potential enemies together, and makes a practice of
invading and occupying 3rd world countries, the US will be increasingly
distrusted and incite the hate and resentment that inspires terrorism. Of
course, like the link I sent you last week suggesting Alchida may be a CIA front
group, if this is the case the huge military budget might be actually increasing
the risks of terrorism against Americans.

Peace
Tom
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: William
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 7:36 PM
   Subject: [existlist] Re: Less tumult





   --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
   >
   > Bill
   >
   > Of course, it is hard to guess what any politician will do. If Rand follows
a similar pattern as his dad, I will be delighted.His dad has the nickname "Dr
No" because he is a MD and votes no on the vast majority of bills that come
up.I've heard many times, he has voted no to 400 hunded something yeses.
Interestingly, on war and civil liberties, Dr Paul has often worked with liberal
Democrats like Kucinich and Frank. Libertarians as well as some of your more
idealistic liberals tend to oppose the mideast wars that have gone on for over 9
years now, as well as the civil liberties encroached on by the war on terror.
They likewise are all enemies of the war on drugs. Libertarians tend to believe
that government on all levels has a tendency to become primarily involved in
perpetuating itself and being a servant of special interests with money. To me
certainly the military industrial complex as well as the police state prison
industrial complex are certainly the two huge areas that not only spend hundreds
of billions of money the government must borrow, but also are involved in
causing deaths, injuries, and unnecesary disruptions of people's lives. Just as
the forces that beat prop 19 in California through various means convinced the
majority of voters to reject it, the forces that support continuous warfare are
always active in making us think that spending hundreds of billions more dollars
to make more missiles, more navy landing boars, build more military bases around
the world, and place more troops around the world is making us more secure. For
over 40 years, there was a cold war in which two monsters faced off with one
another. It was a similar scenario as when Tyson faced Lennox Lewis about 9 or
10 years ago, and got his ass beat. So that was the scenario for US military
expansion for over 40 years. But now there are no Lennox Lewis to beat Tyson.
The US stands to the rest of the world as Tyson to us in terms of being able to
kick ass. Beefing up Tyson to the Great Hulk is unnecesary, and since it
intensifies the resentments of the world toward the US as a huge monster that
can only be dealt with by heroic self sacraficing martrdom. Ron Paul said he'd
like to see US troops withdrawn from all over the world. No one else has that
many troops around the world. I know the US accounts for almost 50% of world
military spending; and I'll bet they account for more than half of troops on
foreign soil. THe military actions performed by the US in the last 9 years in my
opinion have not made us more secure. Unless you are going to kill every one of
a billion Muslims, killing hundeds of thousands and wounding hundreds of
thousands more influences tens of millions of young men in the direction of
terrorism. There is an Islamic code wherein any male over a certain age has a
moral obligation to avenge wrongs done to their family, and in the last 9 years
as the Wikileaks reveals, much wrongs have been done including torturing,raping
etc.hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed, businesses and farms
blown up etc.
   >
   > If a small fraction of the money spent on defense was invested in learning
from Switzerland how to remain neutral and have peace, it would be nice.It has
been almost 200 years since Switzerland was involved in an international
conflict.
   >
   > So I am strongly in favor of avoiding interventionist wars and prosecuting
victimless crime, and favor individuals or groups like libertarians on the right
or George Soros forces on the left that tend to oppose the mideast wars and the
drug war at home.
   >
   > Peace and best luck to all people of good will
   >
   > Tom
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: William
   > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:18 PM
   > Subject: [existlist] Less tumult
   > Tom, Thank you for that frank response. Some years back I was still in the
milatary and staying in a Swiss Hotel. The owner was an equil rank Swiss
Officer.He always pushed me for information and toled me with pride that his
country could be closed and sealed by closing strategic passes in a very short
time. He asked me what I would do if that were done. I told him we could nuke
their cities and but chemical biologicals on their mountains. Since I knew the
Swiss boasted twenty years survival rations for the entire population, I told
him the half life of the bugs was twenty five years. Of course the lesson is you
cant run from a super power and after he considered it all he thanked me and we
were friends. I know we are stronger now than we were then. To have such a
pitiable giant run from an agrarian communist China, or be bullied by a disarmed
and bankrupt Europe should not happen. The whole attention will turn domestic
and Hillary becomes our Ranger, we could noy be better armed. Bill
   >
   >
   > I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have been
at low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political wars
are off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not much
up for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and begin
their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that would
be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we hand
them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world full of hot wars and
huge ideological strife. We took communism down and and though Islam is a threat
there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our new,prime
generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country in a more
peaceful environment.
   > As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I
noted a great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as my generation is
mostly spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and
energy runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hope



Hello Oliver, nice to meet you. A very pertinent and poignant email
there. You can rest assured that there is one Englishmen in a small
cottage in  the delightful Shires of Albion who does care; has always
cared, and will always  care. For as long as I exist anyway.   There is,
something, which is indefinable, an essence, which needs to be  loved.
I have no idea as to how many  members of the human species love this
ineffable, indefinable, essential nature  of something which no finger
can point to and no hand can touch.  But I take consolation in the fact
that I do  know of at least one member of the human species who does.
Imagine that it were  the ONLY one that did. Then it could still be said
that it was loved by a member  of the human species. Therefore proving
that the human species was capable of  such.



Being one solitary human being on this world I look around me and what I
see each day of humanity is enough to make one weep forever. How did it
get like  this? It is so self saturated that it stinks all the way to
eternity and back  again.  Self, self, self, self, self,  greed, greed,
greed, greed, greed, fear, fear, fear, fear, fear. It is an  appalling
shambles. They even want `enlightenment', or whatever they want
to call it, for themselves. That takes the  biscuit of self saturated
greed doesn't it. How can one love, yet whilst seeing  this abortion
of ones real nature, and not abhore; and take up arms against  it!



This is not even a message which is going to reach them is it. I tried,
for a long time. Better to try with the hope which that love engenders
than to  do nothing at all. Would that one could die for the love of
life that the world  might be able to live with it.  But it  seems that
that cannot be done.  In  eternity I learned that something out here was
in need.  I don't know why I learned that,  for I am not capable of
such a task. I wish I  was. But better to try and fail than to have
never tried eh. Strange thing is  hope. It never dies; and it is born
anew again each day in every dew drop and  every smile. No, it is not
the love of pain, for one is not a masochist, but it  is the pain of
love. One day, here in space and time, maybe that love can exist  here
without the pain; as it does in eternity. One hopes so anyway. I saw it
here once.



Dick Richardson.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

AS IS Realistic



[ In Asisian_Knights@yahoogroups.com, "revohoffmann"  <alantra34@...>
wrote:  Re:



Which way will the  USA go in the next fifty years. Thank you so much,
Dick, for this beautifully  worded hope. " make a world that my great
great grandchildren will be happy and proud to live on."  I am the manny
for  my nephews, and if I am still around in fifty years, well, I
wouldn't wish for  them to grow up in America. I have deep faith in the
near infinite stupidity of  this odd species with which I have cast my
lots, but so long as there is even  one polar bear left in the arctic,
and one man in an English cottage somewhere  in the Green that actually
gives a shit—



Can one ever abdicate from knighthood? Maybe  not, but knowing that
there are people like yourself out there; people who have  been touched
by the real; is like seeing a vein of silver flowing through a  muddy
current. It helps me to keep a space open where life can touch me in the
raw, if not for myself, then for the simple sake of everything out there
that  still wants to live, no matter what manner of horrors we dream up
to throw  against it. I grew up in the Commonwealth of Canada, not in
the States, by the  way. I was raised as a European, by good people who
still believed that that  actually meant something. Anyhow, I do think
the States will go the way of  fundamentalism, so as to hasten its own
demise, and that might, in fact, be a  good thing since this ghastly
"city on a hill" seems to be built on the utter  lack of communication
between the two wings of this failed experiment in social  control
through democracy anyway, namely scientism and religion. I abhor the one
as much as I do the other, so let the revolution come to a boiling head
already.



No civilization has ever outlasted the  usefulness of the ideals upon
which it was built, has it? What is the point of  trying to reform
something which is likely to be based upon entirely false  premises to
begin with? Time would be better spent in getting real with  ourselves
and with each other. At this point, I hardly think we are any more
capable of imagining the world after Western civilization than Medieval
monks  were in trying to imagine a world without the Church. Still,
wouldn't it be  something -- a civilization based on an incontrovertible
experience of what?--of  belonging here, no longer in self-imposed
exile, reconciled to that seeming  perversity which made us feel
alienated to begin with, acknowledged as being as  much a part of the
whole natural order of things as we ourselves are while we  sleep? I
won't hold my breath. But you are probably right, Dick....whatever is
coming down the pike is in a hell of a hurry to get  here.



When I feel Chicago thrumming under my feet though, with the wind coming
in off the lake, I get a sense of its wild contours and the entelechy of
its  strange attractors. Its movements, which formed the rocks and the
lake and all  of the people who lived and hoped and died here, moves the
life within me in  resonance to the recognition that that which will
persist even after my great  grand-nephew's own nightmares have been
long forgotten -- that that will die in  its own good time, and not
ours. To ourselves, assuredly, but is our survival as  a species really
that important within the context of a planet's history? Maybe  if we
could learn to live with a bit of panache, or a bit of quality, it might
matter beyond our own lifetimes. If we scarcely live at all, though,
what  matters this form at all? It doesn't seem to me that mere survival
is much of a  motivation, let alone a reason for hanging our hats where
we crap about our  allotted span. Even my tomato plants know better than
that.  Oliver  ]



It was some years ago now that a few of us got  together, just chatting
about things as one does, and frequently using the words  AS IS,
(meaning as is found and experienced to be) that gradually, as if by
chance, it become moulded into ASISIANS; folks, a brotherhood and
sisterhood of  people, who not only spoke of things as they are found to
be and lived to be,  but also preferred it that way as opposed to a
painted angelic candy floss  coating of unrealistic symbolic pretence
painted upon the fabric of reality and  our place in the scheme of
things. It was not a game, it was a philosophic  existential revolution
taking up arms against what the symbolic diatribe and  lies of
priestcraft had done to the mind and spirit of Man.



Whether per chance, or otherwise met, is by the  by, and now irrelevant.
But that a new way of being on the world was needed, and  ushering in a
new paradigm and an awakening of conscience and dignity, and the
application of it,  should be plainly  obvious to all. But how?  That is
the  question. Among that initial group were a few mystics (or so they
like to call  such folks anyway) but whatever name, they were genuine
ones. It has long been  known however that this REALISATION and
understanding due to personal direct  experience cannot be given away
(Psychognosis as I call it, and resulting in a  Homo Ensophicus). So
given that it cannot be given away then what, in any useful  measure,
could be done?



The answer become obvious. A philosophy that  anybody could simply
choose to live, be they mystics or not. They would be doing  BY CHOICE
that which the mystics were  doing NOT BY CHOICE. Doing such would make
them more worthy than any mystic  could ever be, for they would be doing
it for the love of it and unconditional  of the knowing what the mystics
know. Hence the advent of the Fraternity of the  Chivalric Order of the
Asisian Knights and Ladies. This is not a game, and it  has no
connection to an imagined order of chivalric times gone past, for there
was no such thing. But there is now.



That Man is in part on this world and of this  world, and is in part not
of this world, IS as   found to be the case, and lived and known. FACT.
But, to wilfully try to  abdicate the responsibility of either part and
make believe that it is not  really true, is the dichotomy which Man is
now living under the repercussions  of. That one can love this world,
and all it entails, just as one loves that  transcendent realm, and all
that  it  entails, is no dichotomy, no contradiction.   It is so. AS IS.
That humanity finds itself in such an elevated and  unique position is
not only the wonder of all wonders, and the best of both  worlds, but it
raises Man far above any symbolic gods and demons created in the  minds
of perverts for their own vested interests. Such religions are the worst
virus ever to plague the mind of man and which robs him of his true
Dignity and  Worth.  Does it not behove Man to take up  arms against
this prostitution of what we are?   No amount of pacifying them with
nice platitudes will undo what they have  done. After an abortion one
flushes it down the loo, clears the mess up and  moves on. Life on earth
is not easy; but it is worth it. But as of yet there are  few to take
company in that gathering around the camp fire way out in the
wilderness from main-stream society. But, keep at it and we can get
there, for  it is the stuff that life is made of.



Dick Richardson   Asisian.







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tom,

There is not much agreement between right-wing libertarians like you, and
left-wing liberals like me.

Certainly I agree with your foreign policy views and the policy of reducing
military spending to virtually zero.

I also agree with your views on legalising drugs and reducing the prison
population by decriminalising "victimless crimes".

However there the agreement seems to end.

From what I have read of Rand Paul's policies, he doesn't seem to have said
anything about spending on the military and he has sent out mixed messages on
legalising drugs (see policy descriptions below lifted from Wikipedia).

He describes himself as a "social conservative" and opposes abortion and
same-sex marriages. This is very anti-liberal, if not also anti-libertarian. Is
he a "moral majority" fundamentalist Christian in disguise?

Whereas RP does not seem to be a social libertarian, he is certainly an economic
libertarian – someone who wants to reduce taxation to zero if he can.

The problem with this is that it may be fine for the rich, but it is very bad
news for the poor. Low taxation means the poor have poor or non-existent
healthcare, poor or non-existent education, and the unemployed and old are left
to fend for themselves.

Liberatrianism entails that the poor live and die in squalor and misery. There
is no sense of community, no sense of "we are all in this together".
Libertarianism is a "dog eat dog" philosophy of every man for himself. It is a
barbarism which tends to destroy civilization.

Fortunately the extreme right-wing libertarians of the Tea Party don't seem to
have done that well, and more centrist Republicans seems to have done better.
Hopefully the American public will see through the surface to the underlying
truth of libertarianism.

Jim


Rand Paul's policies (according to Wikipedia):

Abortion and bioethics

Paul is opposed to abortion and supports a Human Life Amendment and a Life at
Conception Act.  He also opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest,[116] but
supports use of the morning-after pill.[117] He opposes federal funding for
abortion. He takes a states' rights position, favoring the overturn of Roe vs
Wade and allowing states to decide on the legality of abortions without federal
involvement.

According to the Paul campaign, Paul received a 100% pro-life score on a
Kentucky Right to Life survey and indicated on the survey that he opposed human
cloning. This was disputed by Kentucky Right to Life, however, who endorsed
Paul's primary opponent instead and claimed that Paul did not, in fact, answer
the cloning question.

Medical marijuana

Paul believes the issue of medical marijuana is a states' rights issue and that
the federal government should not interfere. In August, the Associated Press
reported that Paul said he was opposed to the legalization of marijuana for
medicinal purposes, but the Paul campaign says he was misquoted. Paul described
himself as a "social conservative," but was nonetheless described by the AP
reporter as holding "libertarian leanings on drugs" and believing some drug
sentences were too harsh.

Same-sex marriage

Paul opposes same-sex marriage, but believes the issue should be left to the
states to decide.

Illegal immigration

Paul has proposed adding security to the border by installing an underground
electric fence and helicopter stations. He opposes birthright citizenship for
children of illegal immigrants.[136] Paul has said that courts should review the
14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized
in the United States," to conclude whether or not it should apply to the
children of illegal immigrants. If court challenges fail, Paul would support a
constitutional amendment that would deny citizenship to children of illegal
immigrants who are born in the United States.

Education

Paul supports returning control of education to local communities and parents
and thus eliminating the federal Department of Education, but he says that some
functions of the Department of Education, such as disbursing student loans and
Pell Grants, should be transferred to other  departments instead of being
eliminated.[129][130] Paul opposes federal regulation of homeschooling.

Health care

Paul opposes federal government involvement in health care. He would repeal the
HMO Act of 1973 that "drives a wedge between the patient and [one's] doctor". He
believes that government has driven up the cost of health care and causes the
quality and coverage to decrease. Paul would support a free market approach to
health care, including tax deductions for medical expenses. He opposes federal
regulations discouraging businesses from providing coverage. He supports Health
Savings Accounts (HSAs). On Medicare, Paul has suggested higher deductibles as
well as changes to premiums or eligibility rules as ways to address what he sees
as the program's looming financial problems, saying "You want to have more
participation by the person who's receiving the entitlement..."By that I mean
that they need to be more involved with some sort of economic transaction every
time they use their entitlement, and that means they have to bear more of the
burden."] Paul also stated that he does not support such changes for current
retirees or people nearing retirement.

> Bill, you've been tolerated in this group for too long.

Susan, really? Unlike Dickdick the beheaded, Bill often has something
interesting to say, and he doesn't take frigloads of words to say it. He is a
long-term member, and I am not sure why you'd attack him.

On the other hand, why not take care of Dickdick? Block each new login till he
is gone. That would be useful, and we could all stop talking about him.

You have the divine power to save us from Dickdick. Please use your tools
wisely.

Rude Withering Rutabaga

An Asisian suggestion if I may.



Given that music is such an dispensable fact of the Human condition then
I would like to dare suggest a piece of music fitting for Asisians to
contemplate upon, and which hopefully will inspire them, as it did me.
It was  written by somebody said to be a mystic, and I have no reason to
doubt that  assertion; and albeit not a claim of the composer of it.



The piece of music is called the Fantasia on  a Theme of Thomas Tallis.
It is far and away the most advanced music of its form  as yet, and way
ahead of its time still.   Ironically some years ago I found a video
which contains a part of this  tone poem but wherein the video itself is
also of a river next to which I grew  up on. The River Torridge, the
sister river to the River Taw; in the idyllic  shires of Avalon.



The music itself is about the unfolding and the evolution of the human
soul from the primordial spirit of life in the Ground of our Being. How
do I  know?  Well, because it took me home; and  I know. Here is a link
to that video, and followed by a series of six short  videos which try
to explain it. Quite well in fact.   But folks such as myself need no
explanation  of it. But you might enjoy.  Life IS a  mystical
production, from start to end. And it works. Understanding it in
Rational terms does come, but feeling it in Emotional terms to begin
with is all  that matters and all that is needed, and eventually it
resolves back there again  in the Spirit of Humankind. Eternally. It is
so.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-kWBOvfwdg
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-kWBOvfwdg>



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8YNxGmrwU&feature=related
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8YNxGmrwU&feature=related>



rwr





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Mr Rutabaga,

I think Susan has criticised Bill because he often resorts to personal abuse
(see his recent comments on Susan and further back posts to/about me), and his
posts seem to be chiefly  political and not philosophical.

I think that politics and philosophy cannot be easily separated, and a
philosophical position ought to have political consequences, or it is just
abstract "ivory tower" theorising.

I have some sympathy with Susan's view that Existlist should not be just an
airing of political positions, but I think Bill would not be targeted if he cut
out the personal abuse.

Finally I don't think it is easy for Susan to exclude Dick-Head when he changes
his Yahoo login and email address every couple of days. (By the way, you were
the last person to encourage Dick-Head by engaging him in discussion.)

Jim



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "fictiveparrot" <knott12@...> wrote:
>
> > Bill, you've been tolerated in this group for too long.
>
> Susan, really? Unlike Dickdick the beheaded, Bill often has something
interesting to say, and he doesn't take frigloads of words to say it. He is a
long-term member, and I am not sure why you'd attack him.
>
> On the other hand, why not take care of Dickdick? Block each new login till he
is gone. That would be useful, and we could all stop talking about him.
>
> You have the divine power to save us from Dickdick. Please use your tools
wisely.
>
> Rude Withering Rutabaga
>

You folks here love to invent these fictions don't yer, and then to
keep plastering them around like headless chickens and dead parrots. I
use the same email address here every time – the rocket mail one. I
do have two others which I also use: Somerset-2 and ymail. So you are
LYING again as usual. IT IS NOT TRUE. As for the moderation then they
only have to ban the email address and that is it. But they don't.
Why? Who knows. Perhaps they like what I write and have an empathy with
it, thousands, if not millions do.



As for our Existential as well as Phenomenal existence then I was an
existentialist back in the 50's, and always have been. But none of
you are. You are all full of hate, and fear also. A very sad condition
to get into it. But that is your problem not mine.  GROW UP or go the
way of the Dodo.

The name is not Dick-Head by the way. It is Dick Richardson. Maybe you
cant even read yet. And you have the manners unworthy of pigs.



RWR.  a Pragmatic Existentialist and Idealist.




--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Rutabaga,
>
> I think Susan has criticised Bill because he often resorts to personal
abuse (see his recent comments on Susan and further back posts to/about
me), and his posts seem to be chiefly  political and not philosophical.
>
> I think that politics and philosophy cannot be easily separated, and a
philosophical position ought to have political consequences, or it is
just abstract "ivory tower" theorising.
>
> I have some sympathy with Susan's view that Existlist should not be
just an airing of political positions, but I think Bill would not be
targeted if he cut out the personal abuse.
>
> Finally I don't think it is easy for Susan to exclude Dick-Head when
he changes his Yahoo login and email address every couple of days. (By
the way, you were the last person to encourage Dick-Head by engaging him
in discussion.)
>
> Jim
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jim

I am not totally sold on libertarianism, or any other political philosophy. I
stated a few months ago, that in many ways it often appears to me that we are
between the devil and the deep blue sea regarding choosing between free market
capitalism and socialism. There are many weaknesses in both. Western nations
have become mixed economies, but that too has its drawbacks. In practice, in the
US we have big box stores by necesity forced to buy huge quantities at low
prices in China, and then get the products on the shelf at the lowest prices in
order to compete with other big box stores.The people that are employed in these
types of operations have presure to be continually more productive and cost
concious. Then we have government employess and government contractors and their
employees. As opposed to having to compete for getting products on the shelf at
the lowest possible prices, things just cost what they cost. And of course,
there is always presure for anything to expand the easy going, secure, well paid
parts of the economy as opposed to the dog eat dog parts which still operate
largely as the world Dickens wrote about.

As I started out my previous post,  I can't be sure what any politician will do.
How much Rand Paul will vote as his dad has is unknown. And Ron Paul himself has
his own brand of libertarianism.His positions also might be influenced because
he represents a rural Texas district.  Libertarians vary on a number of issues.
Most liberrtarians are pro choice, but some are pro life. Most libertarians are
ok with same sex marriage; whereas some don't see it as necesaryl. . Even if
they are opposed to things though;they usually believe the federal government
should stay out of it and let the states decide.  Libertarians believe
government by nature tends toward corruption and reduced liberty, so they tend
to prefer to keep it as small as possible. They believe government in the US has
expanded as courts have increasingly interpreted the US Constitution allowing
the government to expand far beyond the areas which were originally deemed
necesary. Thomas Jefferson said history tells us nothing about good governments.
I believe these sentiments largely influenced the US Constitution, as the
colonies  were cautious about ratifying anything that was just going to
substitute Washington for King George.The Constitution was like burglar proofing
your home. Strong locks and bars on the windows can slow down thieves, but with
enough time, skill, resources and determination, a thief can eventually get
through them.

As for you describing yourself as a leftwing libertarian, Soros and his Open
Society is a bit in that direction, and I am also rather favorable to them.
Despite big differences on the mix between government and market forces,
libertarians and Open Society types both tend to oppose the drug war as well as
the mideast aggression the US has been involved in over the last 9 years.In
terms of your ideals of social democracy, the northern Europian nations are
nations that score well on the Transparency International rankings, which rank
countries in terms of the degrees of corruption and necesity of bribes found by
people doing international business. In my opinion, nations which long
traditions of corrupt government are poor candidates for moving toward
socialistic agendas. I believe this was a big part of the downfall of the USSR.
Starting from an idealistic concept of from each according to his ability to
each according to his needs, the reality soon evolved into black market
underground dealings as commissars became the new aristocracy."All animals are
equal, but some animals are more equal." Orwell's Animal Farm But that is true
whither in the US or USSR, a government may allegedly start out with the goal of
equality etc, but in effect aristocracies soon develope. In practice, whither we
are talking medieval Europe, the US or the late USSR, political powers are used
to subsidize sectors of the population. In the 80s, I read that USSR military
officers were to a very large extent sons of USSR military officers. Everyone
equal under the law sounds good, but in reality government power is used to
favor egotistic, nepotistic, and cronyiestic objectives as opposed to idealistic
fictions.Whither special interess are the Duke of so and so, or huge megacorps
giving big bucks in campaign contributions, it is a form of aristocracy. And
deep down, we all have a desire to live the secure, affluent, rather leisurely
life of the aristocrat rather than the harried, impoverished life of  Bob
Cratchet, Scrooge's employee.

In the US as well as most of Europe now, years of expanding government goodies
to various groups have created scenarios that must be dealt with. Politicians
are short term opportunists, and can generally be counted on to do whatever will
give them votes in the next election, and not be too concerned about
consequences in 20 or 30 years. States signed union contracts with teachers and
cops giving them pensions at young ages that as more baby boomers retire will
not be sustainable.

I always appreciate your input. Even though, I often may disagree; I find it
interesting to understand how different people perceive the world.

Peace and best wishes
Tom
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Jim
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 8:09 AM
   Subject: [existlist] Rand Paul and the Philosophy of Libertarianism



   Tom,

   There is not much agreement between right-wing libertarians like you, and
left-wing liberals like me.

   Certainly I agree with your foreign policy views and the policy of reducing
military spending to virtually zero.

   I also agree with your views on legalising drugs and reducing the prison
population by decriminalising "victimless crimes".

   However there the agreement seems to end.

   From what I have read of Rand Paul's policies, he doesn't seem to have said
anything about spending on the military and he has sent out mixed messages on
legalising drugs (see policy descriptions below lifted from Wikipedia).

   He describes himself as a "social conservative" and opposes abortion and
same-sex marriages. This is very anti-liberal, if not also anti-libertarian. Is
he a "moral majority" fundamentalist Christian in disguise?

   Whereas RP does not seem to be a social libertarian, he is certainly an
economic libertarian - someone who wants to reduce taxation to zero if he can.

   The problem with this is that it may be fine for the rich, but it is very bad
news for the poor. Low taxation means the poor have poor or non-existent
healthcare, poor or non-existent education, and the unemployed and old are left
to fend for themselves.

   Liberatrianism entails that the poor live and die in squalor and misery. There
is no sense of community, no sense of "we are all in this together".
Libertarianism is a "dog eat dog" philosophy of every man for himself. It is a
barbarism which tends to destroy civilization.

   Fortunately the extreme right-wing libertarians of the Tea Party don't seem to
have done that well, and more centrist Republicans seems to have done better.
Hopefully the American public will see through the surface to the underlying
truth of libertarianism.

   Jim

   Rand Paul's policies (according to Wikipedia):

   Abortion and bioethics

   Paul is opposed to abortion and supports a Human Life Amendment and a Life at
Conception Act. He also opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest,[116] but
supports use of the morning-after pill.[117] He opposes federal funding for
abortion. He takes a states' rights position, favoring the overturn of Roe vs
Wade and allowing states to decide on the legality of abortions without federal
involvement.

   According to the Paul campaign, Paul received a 100% pro-life score on a
Kentucky Right to Life survey and indicated on the survey that he opposed human
cloning. This was disputed by Kentucky Right to Life, however, who endorsed
Paul's primary opponent instead and claimed that Paul did not, in fact, answer
the cloning question.

   Medical marijuana

   Paul believes the issue of medical marijuana is a states' rights issue and
that the federal government should not interfere. In August, the Associated
Press reported that Paul said he was opposed to the legalization of marijuana
for medicinal purposes, but the Paul campaign says he was misquoted. Paul
described himself as a "social conservative," but was nonetheless described by
the AP reporter as holding "libertarian leanings on drugs" and believing some
drug sentences were too harsh.

   Same-sex marriage

   Paul opposes same-sex marriage, but believes the issue should be left to the
states to decide.

   Illegal immigration

   Paul has proposed adding security to the border by installing an underground
electric fence and helicopter stations. He opposes birthright citizenship for
children of illegal immigrants.[136] Paul has said that courts should review the
14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized
in the United States," to conclude whether or not it should apply to the
children of illegal immigrants. If court challenges fail, Paul would support a
constitutional amendment that would deny citizenship to children of illegal
immigrants who are born in the United States.

   Education

   Paul supports returning control of education to local communities and parents
and thus eliminating the federal Department of Education, but he says that some
functions of the Department of Education, such as disbursing student loans and
Pell Grants, should be transferred to other departments instead of being
eliminated.[129][130] Paul opposes federal regulation of homeschooling.

   Health care

   Paul opposes federal government involvement in health care. He would repeal
the HMO Act of 1973 that "drives a wedge between the patient and [one's]
doctor". He believes that government has driven up the cost of health care and
causes the quality and coverage to decrease. Paul would support a free market
approach to health care, including tax deductions for medical expenses. He
opposes federal regulations discouraging businesses from providing coverage. He
supports Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). On Medicare, Paul has suggested higher
deductibles as well as changes to premiums or eligibility rules as ways to
address what he sees as the program's looming financial problems, saying "You
want to have more participation by the person who's receiving the
entitlement..."By that I mean that they need to be more involved with some sort
of economic transaction every time they use their entitlement, and that means
they have to bear more of the burden."] Paul also stated that he does not
support such changes for current retirees or people nearing retirement.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Susan

Why dont u try to block these emails as stated by Dick and see if he evades it.
At least, it would be an experiment.Here is a recent post of his , where he
lists his emails. I dug it out of my deleted items.


You folks here love to invent these fictions don't yer, and then to
keep plastering them around like headless chickens and dead parrots. I
use the same email address here every time - the rocket mail one. I
do have two others which I also use: Somerset-2 and ymail. So you are
LYING again as usual. IT IS NOT TRUE. As for the moderation then they
only have to ban the email address and that is it. But they don't.
Why? Who knows. Perhaps they like what I write and have an empathy with
it, thousands, if not millions do.



Peace and best wishes
Tom


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: fictiveparrot
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 8:24 AM
   Subject: [existlist] Re: Bungling Censors



   > Bill, you've been tolerated in this group for too long.

   Susan, really? Unlike Dickdick the beheaded, Bill often has something
interesting to say, and he doesn't take frigloads of words to say it. He is a
long-term member, and I am not sure why you'd attack him.

   On the other hand, why not take care of Dickdick? Block each new login till he
is gone. That would be useful, and we could all stop talking about him.

   You have the divine power to save us from Dickdick. Please use your tools
wisely.

   Rude Withering Rutabaga





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Of course one could get around it if one wanted to, by simply making
another email address; it only takes 30 seconds. But plainly, whoever
set this group up and runs it has no idea how to set a group up and run
it. Make me moderator or owner for a day and I will ban myself. Do you
trust me?  Do you trust anyone?  I doubt it.



However, I will tell you how to set a group up. Make it open for anyone
to join but keep the emails so that only members can read them. Do NOT
let members see the members list. Also, put all new members on moderated
statues until they have proved themselves. Also DON'T use this
archaic plain text rubbish. Also check the group once a day to see that
existing members are sticking to the topic of the group.  You guys have
no idea at all. Nor of the existential human condition and its various
inner departments.



You are hopeless.



Dick Richardson.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I think Susan has criticised Bill because
> he often resorts to personal abuse

I think everything, including personal abuse, should be tolerated. I mean are we
all made of cardboard? I worked in restaurants for years where abuse was a means
of dialog, not unlike the trading of the N word as almost an endearment in
certain communities (could I paddle more lightly around that?).

> Finally I don't think it is easy for Susan
> to exclude Dick-Head when he changes his Yahoo login

Well, I've run groups, and my guess is if you just ban each email address, it
will soon be pretty dang hard to get in.

> By the way, you were the last person to
> encourage Dick-Head by engaging him in discussion.

If you call what I said to him encouragement, perhaps you are more familiar with
the 'abuse as friendship' than you suggest. I was convinced I could discourage
him... He is more insane than I thought.

Rotting While Righting

> Perhaps they like what I write and have an empathy with
> it, thousands, if not millions do.

Dickdick, thousands? millions? you are a dripping lunatic.

SUSAN, please ban the email address. He says there is only one.

Rough Wick Randsome

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
>
> I don't think the US being bullied is a very strong probability. World opinion
of the US has decreased greatly since the turn of the century. With the cold
war, the USSR was seen by the world in such a negative light, that the US having
a huge military budget, with troops around the world, and the CIA arranging
coues was perceived by the world as necesary to prevent USSR expansion. But with
the ending of the USSR, the global presence and huge military budget of the US,
and current involvement with two wars in the mideast resulted in the US being
perceived in increasingly negative terms.World opinion  of the US has  improved
under Obama,but as long as the US has troops all over the world, a bigger
military budget than all its potential enemies together, and makes a practice of
invading and occupying 3rd world countries, the US will be increasingly
distrusted and incite the hate and resentment that inspires terrorism. Of
course, like the link I sent you last week suggesting Alchida may be a CIA front
group, if this is the case the huge military budget might be actually increasing
the risks of terrorism against Americans.
>
> Peace
> Tom
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: William
>   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 7:36 PM
>   Subject: [existlist] Re: Less tumult
>
>
>
>
>
>   --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
>   >
>   > Bill
>   >
>   > Of course, it is hard to guess what any politician will do. If Rand
follows a similar pattern as his dad, I will be delighted.His dad has the
nickname "Dr No" because he is a MD and votes no on the vast majority of bills
that come up.I've heard many times, he has voted no to 400 hunded something
yeses. Interestingly, on war and civil liberties, Dr Paul has often worked with
liberal Democrats like Kucinich and Frank. Libertarians as well as some of your
more idealistic liberals tend to oppose the mideast wars that have gone on for
over 9 years now, as well as the civil liberties encroached on by the war on
terror. They likewise are all enemies of the war on drugs. Libertarians tend to
believe that government on all levels has a tendency to become primarily
involved in perpetuating itself and being a servant of special interests with
money. To me certainly the military industrial complex as well as the police
state prison industrial complex are certainly the two huge areas that not only
spend hundreds of billions of money the government must borrow, but also are
involved in causing deaths, injuries, and unnecesary disruptions of people's
lives. Just as the forces that beat prop 19 in California through various means
convinced the majority of voters to reject it, the forces that support
continuous warfare are always active in making us think that spending hundreds
of billions more dollars to make more missiles, more navy landing boars, build
more military bases around the world, and place more troops around the world is
making us more secure. For over 40 years, there was a cold war in which two
monsters faced off with one another. It was a similar scenario as when Tyson
faced Lennox Lewis about 9 or 10 years ago, and got his ass beat. So that was
the scenario for US military expansion for over 40 years. But now there are no
Lennox Lewis to beat Tyson. The US stands to the rest of the world as Tyson to
us in terms of being able to kick ass. Beefing up Tyson to the Great Hulk is
unnecesary, and since it intensifies the resentments of the world toward the US
as a huge monster that can only be dealt with by heroic self sacraficing
martrdom. Ron Paul said he'd like to see US troops withdrawn from all over the
world. No one else has that many troops around the world. I know the US accounts
for almost 50% of world military spending; and I'll bet they account for more
than half of troops on foreign soil. THe military actions performed by the US in
the last 9 years in my opinion have not made us more secure. Unless you are
going to kill every one of a billion Muslims, killing hundeds of thousands and
wounding hundreds of thousands more influences tens of millions of young men in
the direction of terrorism. There is an Islamic code wherein any male over a
certain age has a moral obligation to avenge wrongs done to their family, and in
the last 9 years as the Wikileaks reveals, much wrongs have been done including
torturing,raping etc.hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed,
businesses and farms blown up etc.
>   >
>   > If a small fraction of the money spent on defense was invested in learning
from Switzerland how to remain neutral and have peace, it would be nice.It has
been almost 200 years since Switzerland was involved in an international
conflict.
>   >
>   > So I am strongly in favor of avoiding interventionist wars and prosecuting
victimless crime, and favor individuals or groups like libertarians on the right
or George Soros forces on the left that tend to oppose the mideast wars and the
drug war at home.
>   >
>   > Peace and best luck to all people of good will
>   >
>   > Tom
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: William
>   > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>   > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:18 PM
>   > Subject: [existlist] Less tumult
>   > Tom, Thank you for that frank response. Some years back I was still in the
milatary and staying in a Swiss Hotel. The owner was an equil rank Swiss
Officer.He always pushed me for information and toled me with pride that his
country could be closed and sealed by closing strategic passes in a very short
time. He asked me what I would do if that were done. I told him we could nuke
their cities and but chemical biologicals on their mountains. Since I knew the
Swiss boasted twenty years survival rations for the entire population, I told
him the half life of the bugs was twenty five years. Of course the lesson is you
cant run from a super power and after he considered it all he thanked me and we
were friends. I know we are stronger now than we were then. To have such a
pitiable giant run from an agrarian communist China, or be bullied by a disarmed
and bankrupt Europe should not happen. The whole attention will turn domestic
and Hillary becomes our Ranger, we could noy be better armed. Bill
>   >
>   >
>   > I am hoping for a time with less friction and less aggression. We have
been at low level war for a decade and it is slowly running down. The political
wars are off cycle and the cultural battles are less attractive as there is not
much up for grabs. It could be a time for the younger generations to devise and
begin their life paths. A slow but steady economic recovery is possible and that
would be most welcome. It is the forty year olds who are finally at bat and we
hand them a remarkable opportunity. My parents handed me a world full of hot
wars and huge ideological strife. We took communism down and and though Islam is
a threat there seems little chance it will take over the world. I think our
new,prime generations will quickly gain confidence as they take over the country
in a more peaceful environment.
>   > As I listened to some of the young new house of representives members I
noted a great deal of idealism. Their energy is inspiring as my generation is
mostly spent. I see a philosophical change with age as aggression dampens and
energy runs down. Certainly direct argument is repulsive and I find little worth
argueing about. Tom and Irving should be interesting as they seem to understand
the mind sets of Senator Paul and the tea party group. They have a different
perspective that we will have a window on. How a personal philosophy of
existentialism plays out in political thought and action will go on in their
writings. They should give our leftist members somethings to think about. Bill
>   >
>   > Tom, The Fed reserve move to buy bonds from the banks and pay them in cash
seems just more of the same ineffectual  reaction. The banks do not want to lend
with all that cash on hand they can pay their bonsus with no risk. Why risk
defalts on loans when their bottom line is sattisfied by fees? The republicans
are not going to stand for further extensions of unemployment  benefits and then
the trouble will start. All this shuffling of characters in Washington will mean
little to those applying for food stamps and loading their shotguns.
  If you have noticed the Dow is way up on this news, money is pouring into the
market as there is no place else to put it. Commodities are especially strong as
investors want something behind their investments  beside  promises. So now to
satisfy  the moderator mandate  I would ask what you think about following legal
business practices regardless of their affect on many others. For example I will
support the republican  cut off of unemployment benefits as the % tax is most
onerous to me. Our leftist members  may claim moral reservations  but I could 
care less. Business is business,war is war, investment is investment and each
are subject to their own regulation. There is no overreaching
morality,especially in existentialism. I am free to accomplish my own survival.
Bill
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>   >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

And



[Re: Bugeling Censors

I think everything, including personal abuse, should be tolerated. I
mean are we
all made of cardboard? I worked in restaurants for years where abuse was
a means of dialog, not unlike the trading of the N word as almost an
endearment in certain communities (could I paddle more lightly around
that?). Well, I've run groups, and my guess is if you just ban each
email address, it will soon be pretty dang hard to get in. Rotting While
Righting ]



I wonder who would go on your groups. Moreover IF you had run groups
then you would not have to guess as to their running. What were those
groups? What were they about? How many members did they have?  What
happened to them?  So, abuse is endearing is it. You mix in some strange
and unwholesome company it seems, and look what it has done to you, sad
sack. I guess like attracts like. And yes, there are thousands if not
millions of the same philosophy as to my own. Or, they have all be lying
for fifty years. Which I doubt. They are not all like you. You would be
deleted from all groups which are moderated, including mine when I had
them.



Maybe one of the days you will actually write something worth reading.
But I doubt it, you have not got what it takes and your head is right up
a smelly place. Best not drag it out in public. No sir you are not
rotting. You rotted years ago; and have just left a nasty smell behind.



rwr







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]