posted May 05, 2008 03:20 AM            

Maybe my hunch about the dynamic duo was right?

posted May 05, 2008 08:41 AM              

At the end of the day, we all have our opinions, and mine is just as valuable as anybody elses.

I just wanted to make that clear.

posted May 05, 2008 08:57 AM              

Just my opinions of course.....

Edited to add:
But I think its ok to tease each other in a good natured way.

posted May 05, 2008 10:36 AM            

quote:

---

HSC,
"It is a complex issue."

Might it be that it is actually really too simple?

---

Anything's possible, T. Would you care to elaborate on your meaning?

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

I dont think your standpoint is "empty". I just think it is your standpoint.

And it is up to you to defend it, if you care to be understood.

I have enough trouble trying to understand myself and make myself understood,
without being criticized for not understanding someone else, who hardly makes the effort to communicate.

If, as you have often said, you dont really care,
then , by all means, continue to make your "superficial", or "simple" remarks.

And what will be, will be.

I just wish we were not always so at odds.

It is exhilerating and dynamic at times, but, at other times, its just stale.

Sometimes I want more from you than fortune cookies and one-liners.

posted May 05, 2008 11:15 AM            

quote:

---

but the behavior and denial always prevalent in this forum by the "lefties" is disgusting ... and seems to remain in place regardless of who is actually posting over time.

---

I thought we already dealt with this issue of behavior versus behavior. Isn't it true that when Jwhop's not here there's a marked decrease in behavioral issues in GU? If you disagree with that assessment, I'd like to hear on what grounds.

quote:

---

acoustic, dwell on this. Ballsy cannot be the "object" in any sentence.
Ballsy is an adjective which qualifies, describes or modifies a noun...the noun in this case is terrorists...persons, places or things.

---

The issue wasn't regarding the elements of sentences (that's an unusual argument to make). You cannot deny that you've brought this issue of "ballsy" up multiple times. Nor can you deny that that issue is the only one I was responding to (as the term was included in the sentence I responded to). Further, ONLY YOU could even conceive of assuming I would value some lives over others, and on that count your whole argument is ridiculous from the get-go.

quote:

---

Randall, and anyone else who has been making jokes/sarcastic remarks about getting people medicated....in my opinion I don't think it is something we should really be joking about.

---

posted May 05, 2008 11:43 AM              

Okay, I read most of this and I had to give it up. I'm exhausted. I agree with Juni in that it all remained true to the topic with a little twist.

" That's what you say I am but what are you?" LOL

I only have one question. Who exactly are the "Fab Four?" I mean as long as we are dividing folks at LL into the "good guys and the bad guys" I think we need to name the leaders of the bad guys so all the new members can be forewarned by the webmaster of who not to associate with so as to remain in good standing with him.

One thing we can always count on, on the internet, is labels.

Just so I make my affiliations clear as to which side of the political spectrum I lean ( and because I like to aggravate Jwhop ):

posted May 05, 2008 12:04 PM              

I think human beings just like to be understood.

posted May 05, 2008 12:16 PM              

Heaven on Earth, we need it now
I'm sick of all of this hanging around
Sick of sorrow, sick of the pain
I'm sick of hearing again and again
That there's gonna be peace on Earth

Where I grew up there weren't many trees
Where there was we'd tear them down
And use them on our enemies
They say that what you mock
Will surely overtake you

And you become a monster
So the monster will not break you
And it's already gone too far
You say that if you go in hard
You won't get hurt

Jesus can you take the time
To throw a drowning man a line
Peace on Earth

Tell the ones who hear no sound
Whose sons are living in the ground
Peace on Earth

No whos or whys
No one cries like a mother cries
For peace on Earth

She never got to say goodbye
To see the colour in his eyes
Now he's in the dirt
Peace on Earth

They're reading names out over the radio
All the folks the rest of us won't get to know
Sean and Julia, Gareth, Ann, and Breda
Their lives are bigger than any big idea

Jesus can you take the time
To throw a drowning man a line
Peace on Earth

To tell the ones who hear no sound
Whose sons are living in the ground
Peace on Earth

Jesus and the song you wrote
The words are sticking in my throat
Peace on Earth

posted May 05, 2008 12:29 PM            

Perhaps 26taurus's preference not to explain herself may be understood through a quote:

"There is a mistrust in me for dialectic, even for proofs..."

posted May 05, 2008 12:50 PM              

quote:

---

Mirandee, the 'Fab Four' are also known as the '4 Gnats'!

---

posted May 05, 2008 12:53 PM            

"Nietzsche is no “thinker” in the usual sense of the word. For the deeply penetrating and valid questions which he had to ask in regard to the world and life, mere thinking was not sufficient. For these questions, all the forces of human nature must be unchained; intellectual thinking alone is not sufficient for the task. Nietzsche has no confidence in merely intellectually conceived reasons for an opinion. “There is a mistrust in me for dialectic, even for proofs” he writes to Georg Brandes on the 2nd of December 1887 (see his Menschen und Werke, Men and Works, p. 212). For those who would ask the reasons for his opinions, he is ready with the answer of Zarathustra, “You ask why? I do not belong to those of whom one may ask their why.” For him, a criterion was not that an opinion could be proved logically, but rather if it acted upon all forces of the human personality in such a way that it had value for life. He grants validity to a thought only if he finds it will add to the development of life. To see man as healthy as possible, as powerful as possible, as creative as possible, is his desire. Truth, beauty, all ideals, have value and concern the human being only to the extent that they foster life."

-Rudolf Steiner, Friedrich Nietzsche, Fighter for Freedom

posted May 05, 2008 12:53 PM            

Thanks Nosis.

posted May 05, 2008 12:58 PM            

BOY HOWDY

I have to admit that I find the phrase, "foster life," to be rather vague. Philosophies that are on a surface level, destructive, can foster life because they make us break free of them to find truth. Often times we become more powerful because we have been humbled by things that may not appear to "foster life" but actually do.

posted May 05, 2008 01:22 PM            

quote:

---

If your remark is, in part, targeted at HSC then I would have to disagree. I don't think he is "anti-Nietzsche" at heart.
He, like all of us, is just trying to understand to the best of his ability.

---

posted May 05, 2008 01:29 PM            

Nietzsche was many things, but to make any kind of religion or system out of him or his thought or his soul, would not be congruous with who he was and what he intended for himself and for the world. Discovering who he was and what he sincerely thought and felt is impossible, but, then, endeavoring to do the impossible is the journey of a lifetime. However, it was the journey of Nietzsche's lifetime, and nobody else's. If there is one thing we can say that Nietzsche believed for certain, it is that a man should find his own way to the truth of his own heart. In this regard, it may be said that I am a follower of Nietzsche. But I am only a follower in the sense that I go my own way, which is not his way, but his way for me.