Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The Royal Joust--First Tilt--Second Passer

Expand Messages
  • Will Brown
    Don to Willy: I don t see a dimes worth of difference between your and JS s views. Jim to all: It s good to see that the discussion between myself and Willy is
    Message 1 of 52 , Dec 4, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Don to Willy: I don't see a dimes worth of difference between your and
      JS's views.

      Jim to all: It's good to see that the discussion between myself and
      Willy is being carefully followed by the members of this forum.

      Willy to all: Ah, the implications suggested by Don not seeing a
      "dimes worth of difference" between JS and myself are such that not
      even finding an elephant in one's living room could outdo it. I will
      follow up on those implications.That JS saw the exposure of exposing
      yours truly as crazy as the important thing is worth more than a dime,
      like no quarter asked?
    • KTP
      p.s. It was a sad birthday for me in 1980. I always go to the park when I m in NY. n ... and ... I m ... borrowings! ... be ... four-line ... to ... lack ...
      Message 52 of 52 , Dec 7, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        p.s. It was a sad birthday for me in 1980. I always go to the park when
        I'm in NY.

        n


        --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "KTP" <nnn88388@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Well Meddy,
        >
        > When you're by yourself or in here you ken be in the present; but when
        > you're out there (among those bastard pigs!); you got to look ahead
        and
        > watch your back too! You gotta watch those 'gourounia'! And remember;
        > 'don't scatter your pearls among swine'. They'll only trample on them.
        > Just giv'em the money and, from now on, stay under 60. BTW, tomorrow
        I'm
        > 62.!
        >
        > rockboy
        >
        > "Now somewhere in the black mining hills of Dakota
        > There lived a young boy named Rocky Raccoon
        > And one day his woman ran off with another guy
        > Hit young Rocky in the eye Rocky didn't like that
        > He said I'm gonna get that boy
        > So one day he walked into town
        > Booked himself a room in the local saloon.
        >
        > Rocky Raccoon checked into his room
        > Only to find Gideon's bible
        > Rocky had come equipped with a gun
        > To shoot off the legs of his rival
        > His rival it seems had broken his dreams
        > By stealing the girl of his fancy.
        > Her name was Magil and she called herself Lil
        > But everyone knew her as Nancy.
        > Now she and her man who called himself Dan
        > Were in the next room at the hoe down
        > Rocky burst in and grinning a grin
        > He said Danny boy this is a showdown
        > But Daniel was hot-he drew first and shot
        > And Rocky collapsed in the corner.
        >
        > Now the doctor came in stinking of gin
        > And proceeded to lie on the table
        > He said Rocky you met your match
        > And Rocky said, Doc it's only a scratch
        > And I'll be better I'll be better doc as soon as I am able.
        >
        > Now Rocky Raccoon he fell back in his room
        > Only to find Gideon's bible
        > A Gideon checked out and he left it no doubt
        > To help with good Rocky's revival."
        >
        > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
        > hidepark21@ wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > 've just glanced at it now that you've mentioned it. Maowah, he has
        > > found out so many things! And all on his own, no help, no
        borrowings!
        > > What a brain, this Barth, what a brain!
        > >
        > > Remains the form of Nielsen's paper.. So doctoral... And:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > 'A proper discussion of these matters can naturally not be attempted
        > > here, but two points may be offered for consideration'
        > >
        > >
        > > Hmm, what's that supposed to mean? That this paper is not meant to
        be
        > a
        > > proper discussion? Well, then, why write it?
        > >
        > > Yeah, well, I am feeling myself a bit Eenish in mood today. I have
        > just
        > > been fined 90€ for speeding, imagine, me, speeding!
        > >
        > > The redoubled irony of it is that my actual speed, according to the
        > very
        > > official authoritative tachymeter was... 62km/h! On a four-line
        > drive!!!
        > > Must be a world record or something!
        > >
        > >
        > > Wow, that is some speed indeed! I was driving at 62km/h on a
        four-line
        > > drive therefore I am fined 90€ for... Speeding.
        > >
        > > It is a jolly piece of nonsense, is it not? I wonder when they come
        to
        > > think of fining for the lack of speed as well...
        > >
        > > And perhaps one day they'll give you a ticket for both excess and
        lack
        > > of speed!
        > >
        > > "Baby you can drive my car..."
        > > A crossed 62 km/h Maniac Driver Meddy
        > >
        > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" wilbro99@
        > > wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > And speaking of suspended in mid air; readeth you about the
        Barthian
        > > > 'betweeness' that is a nothing seeking to be something that can
        only
        > > be
        > > > filled by letting God come through the gate of the incarnation?
        > Nickle
        > > > put it in the files; fascinating read. Sounds like a structure of
        > some
        > > > sort. []
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
        > > > hidepark21@ wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > I think therefore I am that you really exaggerate willyboy!
        > > > >
        > > > > 'when something is getting out of hand it is being dropped';
        > > > >
        > > > > therefore, all off hand remarks must fall under the spell of
        > > gravity;
        > > > or
        > > > > not!
        > > > >
        > > > > Now will you drop it? Noey you sureley wun't, soey let's seigh
        > > its...
        > > > > suspennn' did in mid air!
        > > > >
        > > > > Call it if you will lightihood, a vapour or... the drift; or
        call
        > it
        > > > > not!
        > > > >
        > > > > Falling down, stationarily
        > > > > Meddy
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Will Brown" wilbro99@
        > > > > wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > If I understand the situation correctly, when something is
        > getting
        > > > out
        > > > > > of hand it is being dropped; therefore, all off hand remarks
        > must
        > > > fall
        > > > > > under the spell of gravity; or not!
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > "The fact that there is a pseudonym is the qualitative
        > > > expression
        > > > > > > > that there is a poet-communication, that it is not I who
        > > speaks
        > > > > but
        > > > > > > > another, that it is addressed to me just as much as to
        > others;
        > > > it
        > > > > is as if
        > > > > > > > the spirit speaks, while I get the inconvenience of being
        > the
        > > > > editor."
        > > > > > > > (PV, Hong, Supplement, p. 227)
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > The spirit, in speaking, edifies both the speaker and the
        > > spoken
        > > > > to.
        > > > > > > > What is this spirit speaking to if not the category of
        > spirit,
        > > > and
        > > > > > > > does not the pseudonymous authors speak to that category?
        > > Isn't
        > > > > this the
        > > > > > > > way of someone with an insight that leaves behind an
        > > > understanding
        > > > > that
        > > > > > > > requires being brought into the realm of words? What is
        that
        > > > > > > > insight? Well, if you ask me it is the revelation that the
        > > > > temporal sense of
        > > > > > > > self, that which one is, is, in some way, not who one is?
        > Now,
        > > > > color
        > > > > > > > me crazy, if you will, but that is what I see the
        > pseudonymous
        > > > > bunch
        > > > > > > > continually speaking to. [wb]
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > PS-
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Now what do you mean to imply by this? That the category: the
        > > > > pseudonymous, non content with being the occasion of a dutiful
        > > respect
        > > > > of the qualitative distinction in the writing is also a manner
        of
        > > > > self-edification in the reading for it poses the writer as his
        > first
        > > > > reader? Hence that, far from being a way to comfortably set a
        > > > distance,
        > > > > a preventive distance, between the speaker and the speach, it is
        a
        > > > > manner to make of himself his first auditor? Ohhh! But is this
        an
        > > > > authorised reading... Is it not rather an author's rising
        reading?
        > > > What
        > > > > kind of climaxatic combination of pretention and modesty is
        that?
        > > > Like:
        > > > > "I demand to be considered just as... the next guy!" Hmm...
        > > > Dialectical,
        > > > > so dialectical...
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > PPS-
        > > > >
        > > > > Yes, you are the best of us all, willyboy! Is that that you
        wanted
        > > to
        > > > > hear from my part? Well if you are, I wonder what the
        satisfaction
        > > of
        > > > > being told so may be? Unless you are the one speaking that is...
        > > > >
        > > > > Which leaves naturally yet another possibility...
        > > > >
        > > > > ...that your name Daffodilius II should be?
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.