Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Do People Really Change?
18 views
Skip to first unread message
Dover Beach
May 22, 2012, 7:29:42 PM5/22/12
to
So I'm looking at Facebook, and I'm looking at the profile and wall of
this colossal bitch from junior high and high school. Our last names
start with the same initial, so we were sometimes shoved together in
seating arrangements. She was incredibly mean. I could recite some of
the stuff she said to me, but it wasn't very clever or original. She
had a difficult home life, but so did I, and I didn't say a quarter of
the shit she said.
Now she runs a non-profit enterprise in Costa Rica saving child
prostitutes. She adopted Russian orphans (now grown.) She seems to be a
pretty hard-core Christian, which she most definitely was not in high
school. She was tough as nails and mean as a scorpion in junior high. There
is no evidence in any of the material online about her or by her that she
has made remarks about an individual's body odor lately.
I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
bastard to decent human being?
this colossal bitch from junior high and high school. Our last names
start with the same initial, so we were sometimes shoved together in
seating arrangements. She was incredibly mean. I could recite some of
the stuff she said to me, but it wasn't very clever or original. She
had a difficult home life, but so did I, and I didn't say a quarter of
the shit she said.
Now she runs a non-profit enterprise in Costa Rica saving child
prostitutes. She adopted Russian orphans (now grown.) She seems to be a
pretty hard-core Christian, which she most definitely was not in high
school. She was tough as nails and mean as a scorpion in junior high. There
is no evidence in any of the material online about her or by her that she
has made remarks about an individual's body odor lately.
I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
bastard to decent human being?
Lee Ayrton
May 22, 2012, 8:32:25 PM5/22/12
to
Dover Beach
May 22, 2012, 8:47:25 PM5/22/12
to
Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote in
news:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
I'm not forgiving him.
news:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
I'm not forgiving him.
Greg Goss
May 22, 2012, 9:54:02 PM5/22/12
to
not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
unforgiveable.
It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
you realize that "there's something wrong here."
--
I used to own a mind like a steel trap.
Perhaps if I'd specified a brass one, it
wouldn't have rusted like this.
Mark Steese
May 23, 2012, 12:17:22 AM5/23/12
to
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in
news:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote in
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 23:29:42 +0000, Dover Beach wrote:
>
>>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
>>>> rat bastard to decent human being?
>>>
>>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>>
>>How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over
>>12, I'm not forgiving him.
>
> Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> unforgiveable.
>
> It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> you realize that "there's something wrong here."
Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
"terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is dependent
upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can literally be scared
shitless.
If Seamus was not, in fact, terrified, but was simply suffering from
gastrointestinal upset (as has been known to happen to non-terrified
dogs), Romney's decision to put him back in the carrier makes a bit more
sense. Romney had packed his entire family into the station wagon for a
650-mile trip from Massachusetts to Ontario. Seamus's carrier was on the
roof because there was no room for it in the car. If you were given the
choice between driving the rest of the way to Ontario with a dog who
might have another attack of diarrhea riding inside the car with you,
your wife, and your kids, or driving the rest of the way with the dog
riding in his carrier outside the car, I reckon you'd do exactly what
Romney did.
And even if Seamus *was* terrified (which, he being an Irish setter, I
tend to doubt), I question the seriousness of anyone who would proclaim
Romney's behavior "unforgiveable" while turning a blind eye to Obama's
extrajudicial assassinations. Seamus survived the trip with no ill
effects: Romney's sister Jane, who adopted Seamus a few years
afterwards, didn't even know about the incident till she read about it
in the Boston Globe in 2008.
To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
much.
--
The least objectionable of the inland scavengers is the raven,
frequenter of the desert ranges, the same called locally "carrion crow."
He is handsomer and has such an air. -Mary Austin
news:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote in
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 23:29:42 +0000, Dover Beach wrote:
>
>>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
>>>> rat bastard to decent human being?
>>>
>>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>>
>>How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over
>>12, I'm not forgiving him.
>
> Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> unforgiveable.
>
> It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> you realize that "there's something wrong here."
"terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is dependent
upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can literally be scared
shitless.
If Seamus was not, in fact, terrified, but was simply suffering from
gastrointestinal upset (as has been known to happen to non-terrified
dogs), Romney's decision to put him back in the carrier makes a bit more
sense. Romney had packed his entire family into the station wagon for a
650-mile trip from Massachusetts to Ontario. Seamus's carrier was on the
roof because there was no room for it in the car. If you were given the
choice between driving the rest of the way to Ontario with a dog who
might have another attack of diarrhea riding inside the car with you,
your wife, and your kids, or driving the rest of the way with the dog
riding in his carrier outside the car, I reckon you'd do exactly what
Romney did.
And even if Seamus *was* terrified (which, he being an Irish setter, I
tend to doubt), I question the seriousness of anyone who would proclaim
Romney's behavior "unforgiveable" while turning a blind eye to Obama's
extrajudicial assassinations. Seamus survived the trip with no ill
effects: Romney's sister Jane, who adopted Seamus a few years
afterwards, didn't even know about the incident till she read about it
in the Boston Globe in 2008.
To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
much.
--
The least objectionable of the inland scavengers is the raven,
frequenter of the desert ranges, the same called locally "carrion crow."
He is handsomer and has such an air. -Mary Austin
Greg Goss
May 23, 2012, 12:25:39 AM5/23/12
to
Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>much.
The question about the murders is only relevant if we expect that a
>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>much.
Republican who has hired a large number of Bush II advisors will be
reluctant to do the same thing. We can be upset about Obama doing it
without it becoming a reason to reject him.
Priority: 92%. Will A do this. yes. Will B do this. yes
Priority: 24%. Dis A do this. no. Did B do this. yes.
Veronique
May 23, 2012, 12:24:32 AM5/23/12
to
On May 22, 5:47 pm, Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote innews:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
He was over 12 when he orchestrated holding down a fellow student
whose sexual orientation he didn't approve of, and cutting off his
hair.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
> Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote innews:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
whose sexual orientation he didn't approve of, and cutting off his
hair.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Veronique
May 23, 2012, 12:29:16 AM5/23/12
to
On May 22, 9:17 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote in
fear? They simply exhibit "fear-like" behaviors? What?
> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote in
> >>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 23:29:42 +0000, Dover Beach wrote:
>
> >>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
> >>>> rat bastard to decent human being?
>
> >>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>
> >>How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over
> >>12, I'm not forgiving him.
>
> > Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> > not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> > unforgiveable.
>
> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> > you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>
> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is dependent
> upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can literally be scared
> shitless.
Dogs don't experience fear? Dogs don't have physiological reactions to
>
> >>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
> >>>> rat bastard to decent human being?
>
> >>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>
> >>How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over
> >>12, I'm not forgiving him.
>
> > Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> > not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> > unforgiveable.
>
> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> > you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>
> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is dependent
> upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can literally be scared
> shitless.
fear? They simply exhibit "fear-like" behaviors? What?
Veronique
May 23, 2012, 12:43:11 AM5/23/12
to
also. I did have a former college boyfriend change from being two-
thirds of an ass to a rather thoughtful human being after visiting
Nepal and turning to Buddhism. It shocked me, in fact, because it was
so out of character, but it appears to have stuck. I don't know
whether there was an innate wellspring of thoughtfulness that had been
laid over with a veneer of assholitry or whether he really did have a
sea-change, but it personality was markedly different before-and-
after.
I had a coworker who was vicious, and some years later turned to
Christianity and has since tried to friend me. Her posts, so far as I
can tell, are perky and upbeat, but then she was generally perky and
upbeat even as she was eviscerating the next person down the line when
I worked with her. I heard she went into hospice work, and her former
coworkers agreed it was sort of perfect, because the patients would
die before she would get tired of the angelic nurturing act. Perhaps
she really changed, I wouldn't trust her an inch.
I have a sister(!) (you knew this was coming, didn't you?) who claims
she's changed and then gets mad when the same behaviors that have
alienated her friends and family her entire life continue to alienate
friends and family. That is more a desire to be perceived as changing,
rather than any behavioral evidence.
I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
still means having control over the lives of other people while still
getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
a cynic, though.
Nasti J
May 23, 2012, 1:03:35 AM5/23/12
to
> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
> bastard to decent human being?
While others wander off on the Romney tangent, I will address your
> bastard to decent human being?
original question - I've not had that exact experience. I do know
people who've "reformed" and gone from serious drug and alcohol use to
being super-clean and deeply involved in helping others stop using. I
don't know that a personality change is necessarily involved -
sometimes the flip side of a dedicated partier is a zealot. There are
plenty of people who do good things for the wrong reasons - do you
actually know that she's become a decent human being? Or just that
she's doing things that (she hopes) other people will admire?
bill van
May 23, 2012, 1:23:28 AM5/23/12
to
In article <XnsA05BB1F886D28mo...@130.133.4.11>,
Sure, and the other way around as well. Some people change for the
better, some for the worse, and some stay fairly constant. I think you
have to judge each case/person individually; there are no reliable
rules. Generalizing would mean judging people without the benefit of
evidence.
But I can see avoiding contact with someone who has aggrieved you in the
past to avoid the risk of reopening old wounds.
bill
better, some for the worse, and some stay fairly constant. I think you
have to judge each case/person individually; there are no reliable
rules. Generalizing would mean judging people without the benefit of
evidence.
But I can see avoiding contact with someone who has aggrieved you in the
past to avoid the risk of reopening old wounds.
bill
Mary
May 23, 2012, 9:33:59 AM5/23/12
to
On May 22, 11:43 pm, Veronique <veroniqueuni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
> a cynic, though.
No, you're a realist. I've seen this too.
> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
> a cynic, though.
Mary
S. Checker
May 23, 2012, 10:19:23 AM5/23/12
to
Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
> bastard to decent human being?
Me, sometimes I think.
> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
> bastard to decent human being?
And sometimes I think it didn't take.
--
If someone asks for a cite of John Ashcroft's antlike mandibles
squeezing the thorax of an American, then by gosh the given cite should
include John Ashcroft and mandibles,
-- Groo, in afc-a
Mark Steese
May 23, 2012, 11:24:00 AM5/23/12
to
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in news:a2376e...@mid.individual.net:
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>>much.
>
> The question about the murders is only relevant if we expect that a
> Republican who has hired a large number of Bush II advisors will be
> reluctant to do the same thing. We can be upset about Obama doing it
> without it becoming a reason to reject him.
I'd say a president's willingness to piss on the Constitution and kill
people is *always* more relevant than his opponent's having once put a
diarrhetic Irish setter back on top of a station wagon. The relevance of
the latter to Mitt Romney's qualifications to be PoTUS is exactly zero; and
there are numerous sound policy reasons to reject Romney's presidential
bid.
And I'm disgusted, not upset.
--
Usually annihilating a culture and romanticizing it are done separately,
but Bunnell neatly compresses two stages of historical change into one
conversation. -Rebecca Solnit
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>>much.
>
> The question about the murders is only relevant if we expect that a
> Republican who has hired a large number of Bush II advisors will be
> reluctant to do the same thing. We can be upset about Obama doing it
> without it becoming a reason to reject him.
people is *always* more relevant than his opponent's having once put a
diarrhetic Irish setter back on top of a station wagon. The relevance of
the latter to Mitt Romney's qualifications to be PoTUS is exactly zero; and
there are numerous sound policy reasons to reject Romney's presidential
bid.
And I'm disgusted, not upset.
--
Usually annihilating a culture and romanticizing it are done separately,
but Bunnell neatly compresses two stages of historical change into one
conversation. -Rebecca Solnit
art...@yahoo.com
May 23, 2012, 12:13:52 PM5/23/12
to
in person are very difficult to deal with*. She might be like that. I
would imagine you would have to be tough to deal with the sort of
people you have to deal with in saving child prostitutes (not to
mention the kids themselves, who may not always be angelic).
*I can't recall meeting anybody like this though. I try to avoid
people who take the "Army" in "Salvation Army too literally.
Xho Jingleheimerschmidt
May 23, 2012, 9:03:12 PM5/23/12
to
On 05/22/2012 05:47 PM, Dover Beach wrote:
> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
> I'm not forgiving him.
I'd sooner forgive him people who put them in aircraft holds. Or even
> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
> I'm not forgiving him.
worse, passenger cabins.
Xho
Xho Jingleheimerschmidt
May 23, 2012, 9:03:43 PM5/23/12
to
On 05/22/2012 06:54 PM, Greg Goss wrote:
> Dover Beach<moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lee Ayrton<lay...@panix.com> wrote in
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 23:29:42 +0000, Dover Beach wrote:
>
>>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>>> bastard to decent human being?
>>>
>>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>>
>> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
>> I'm not forgiving him.
>
> Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> unforgiveable.
>
> It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> you realize that "there's something wrong here."
Obviously, dogs never shit except out of terror.
> Dover Beach<moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lee Ayrton<lay...@panix.com> wrote in
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 23:29:42 +0000, Dover Beach wrote:
>
>>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>>> bastard to decent human being?
>>>
>>> Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>>
>> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
>> I'm not forgiving him.
>
> Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It may
> not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
> unforgiveable.
>
> It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
> terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that point
> you realize that "there's something wrong here."
Xho
Stan
May 23, 2012, 9:04:18 PM5/23/12
to
S. Checker wrote:
> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>> bastard to decent human being?
>
> Me, sometimes I think.
>
> And sometimes I think it didn't take.
Brother!
> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>> bastard to decent human being?
>
> Me, sometimes I think.
>
> And sometimes I think it didn't take.
--
I need a new signature.
Stan in NJ
Message has been deleted
Mark Steese
May 24, 2012, 2:08:05 AM5/24/12
to
Cindbear <cind...@phonehome.com> wrote in
news:638rr7had1aij2pt0...@4ax.com:
> On 22 May 2012 23:29:42 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com>
I had one of those once. It didn't help.
> Sometimes that leads to bible-thumping too.
Luckily I did manage to avoid that.
--
The Alps are grand in their beauty, Mount Shasta is sublime in its
desolation. -William H. Brewer
news:638rr7had1aij2pt0...@4ax.com:
> On 22 May 2012 23:29:42 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>bastard to decent human being?
>
> I've found that a brush with death usually helps temper a personality.
>
>>I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>bastard to decent human being?
>
I had one of those once. It didn't help.
> Sometimes that leads to bible-thumping too.
Luckily I did manage to avoid that.
--
The Alps are grand in their beauty, Mount Shasta is sublime in its
desolation. -William H. Brewer
Mark Steese
May 24, 2012, 2:54:10 AM5/24/12
to
Veronique <veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:16e6c444-edc8-405a...@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com:
> On May 22, 9:17 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote
>> innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
their hair turns white overnight, you'd say I was arguing that people
don't experience fear? That they don't have physiological reactions to
fear? The answers are no and no, respectively. So why the hostility? Is
it because I don't take the media's spin on the Seamus Incident
seriously, or is it because you think I'm a jerk and consequently don't
bother to pay attention to what I've actually written? Well, news flash:
I *am* a jerk. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.
The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea. Ann Romney says
Seamus got the shits after eating some turkey that had been left out on
the counter, which may or may not be true, but is at least as plausible,
if not more so - in my experience, when a dog or a cat has bowel
troubles, the most likely cause is something the critter ate, and in my
experience both dogs and cats are more than happy to eat things that
will cause vomiting and/or diarrhea later.
My parents' dog, Ginger, was a sweet animal, but God *damn* that dog
would eat some horrible things. She remains to this day the only dog
I've ever seen choke down a live toad: the toad was freely secreting
toxins, and she was clearly distressed, but she wouldn't stop till she
finished eating it, and she wouldn't let us get near her, either - that
was *her* toad.
I've seen plenty of dogs riding in the open beds of pickup trucks
zipping down highways at 65 mph or more; all of them displayed behaviors
I associate more with "having a blast" than "being scared shitless." I'm
inclined to credit the Romneys when they assert that Seamus generally
enjoyed riding in the carrier on top of the station wagon: it seems like
the sort of thing an Irish setter would enjoy.
No one ever seems to bring up the fact that the Romneys brought Seamus
on the trip with them because they didn't want to board him in a kennel
for two weeks. In exchange for riding on top of the car for several
hours in each direction, Seamus got to be with his family at their
summer cottage in Ontario for two weeks. I've known enough Irish setters
to believe that even if he was scared during the ride, he got a net
benefit from not being kenneled.
And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
news:16e6c444-edc8-405a...@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com:
> On May 22, 9:17 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote
>> innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
>> > Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It
>> > may not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
>> > unforgiveable.
>>
>> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
>> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that
>> > point you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>>
>> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
>> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is
>> dependent upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can
>> literally be scared shitless.
>
> Dogs don't experience fear? Dogs don't have physiological reactions to
> fear? They simply exhibit "fear-like" behaviors? What?
If I questioned the belief that someone can be scared so badly that
>> > may not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
>> > unforgiveable.
>>
>> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
>> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that
>> > point you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>>
>> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
>> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is
>> dependent upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can
>> literally be scared shitless.
>
> Dogs don't experience fear? Dogs don't have physiological reactions to
> fear? They simply exhibit "fear-like" behaviors? What?
their hair turns white overnight, you'd say I was arguing that people
don't experience fear? That they don't have physiological reactions to
fear? The answers are no and no, respectively. So why the hostility? Is
it because I don't take the media's spin on the Seamus Incident
seriously, or is it because you think I'm a jerk and consequently don't
bother to pay attention to what I've actually written? Well, news flash:
I *am* a jerk. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.
The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea. Ann Romney says
Seamus got the shits after eating some turkey that had been left out on
the counter, which may or may not be true, but is at least as plausible,
if not more so - in my experience, when a dog or a cat has bowel
troubles, the most likely cause is something the critter ate, and in my
experience both dogs and cats are more than happy to eat things that
will cause vomiting and/or diarrhea later.
My parents' dog, Ginger, was a sweet animal, but God *damn* that dog
would eat some horrible things. She remains to this day the only dog
I've ever seen choke down a live toad: the toad was freely secreting
toxins, and she was clearly distressed, but she wouldn't stop till she
finished eating it, and she wouldn't let us get near her, either - that
was *her* toad.
I've seen plenty of dogs riding in the open beds of pickup trucks
zipping down highways at 65 mph or more; all of them displayed behaviors
I associate more with "having a blast" than "being scared shitless." I'm
inclined to credit the Romneys when they assert that Seamus generally
enjoyed riding in the carrier on top of the station wagon: it seems like
the sort of thing an Irish setter would enjoy.
No one ever seems to bring up the fact that the Romneys brought Seamus
on the trip with them because they didn't want to board him in a kennel
for two weeks. In exchange for riding on top of the car for several
hours in each direction, Seamus got to be with his family at their
summer cottage in Ontario for two weeks. I've known enough Irish setters
to believe that even if he was scared during the ride, he got a net
benefit from not being kenneled.
And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
BillT...@invalid.com
May 24, 2012, 3:32:35 AM5/24/12
to
On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Veronique
<veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
>certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>a cynic, though.
Well have _you_ rescued any prostitutes lately?
<veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
>certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>a cynic, though.
BillT...@invalid.com
May 24, 2012, 3:37:11 AM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:44:44 -0400, Cindbear <cind...@phonehome.com>
wrote:
process, which is frequently short-circuited by drug &/or alcohol
abuse, or other barriers.
wrote:
>>I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>bastard to decent human being?
>
>
>>bastard to decent human being?
>
>
>I've found that a brush with death usually helps temper a personality.
>Sometimes that leads to bible-thumping too.
Civil, socialized behavior is usually a part of the maturation
process, which is frequently short-circuited by drug &/or alcohol
abuse, or other barriers.
Mark Steese
May 24, 2012, 5:00:09 AM5/24/12
to
BillT...@invalid.com wrote in news:m3prr7tgs144ap2p04o1otgminfc3es484
@4ax.com:
Social skills are acquired during childhood, not as part of the
maturation process. If you're inadequately socialized as a child, you
are, as they say, shit out of luck: I hope you enjoy inadvertently
antagonizing people, because you'll be doing that a lot. Not wanting
friends also helps, since you won't have any. Basically, your best bet
is to delude yourself into believing you're a genius and other people
just aren't worthy of you; you may want to study economics while you're
at it. Do not, under any circumstances, develop an introspective streak:
the only thing worse than having no social skills is becoming aware of
having no social skills. Trust me, that's not a road you want to go
down.
If you're curious about what it's like to become aware of that, the
next-to-last panel of this XKCD may give you some idea:
http://www.xkcd.com/1027/
"The thing standing in the way of your dreams is that the person having
them is you" sums up the inadequately socialized life very nicely. As
Spinoza said, man is a social animal. We need other people's help to
succeed, and the rules that govern the social interactions that enable
us to receive and provide that help are as myriad and complex as the
rules that govern language: you gotta learn 'em early in life if you're
gonna learn 'em at all. And if you *don't* learn 'em...well, look on the
bright side. At least you can annoy the crap out of people on USENET!
--
Experts insist that the reason these switches go bad is because they're
hardly ever used. In other words, the less wear a switch gets the
quicker it wears out. That's difficult to believe, but so are a lot of
things. -Dereck Williamson
@4ax.com:
maturation process. If you're inadequately socialized as a child, you
are, as they say, shit out of luck: I hope you enjoy inadvertently
antagonizing people, because you'll be doing that a lot. Not wanting
friends also helps, since you won't have any. Basically, your best bet
is to delude yourself into believing you're a genius and other people
just aren't worthy of you; you may want to study economics while you're
at it. Do not, under any circumstances, develop an introspective streak:
the only thing worse than having no social skills is becoming aware of
having no social skills. Trust me, that's not a road you want to go
down.
If you're curious about what it's like to become aware of that, the
next-to-last panel of this XKCD may give you some idea:
http://www.xkcd.com/1027/
"The thing standing in the way of your dreams is that the person having
them is you" sums up the inadequately socialized life very nicely. As
Spinoza said, man is a social animal. We need other people's help to
succeed, and the rules that govern the social interactions that enable
us to receive and provide that help are as myriad and complex as the
rules that govern language: you gotta learn 'em early in life if you're
gonna learn 'em at all. And if you *don't* learn 'em...well, look on the
bright side. At least you can annoy the crap out of people on USENET!
--
Experts insist that the reason these switches go bad is because they're
hardly ever used. In other words, the less wear a switch gets the
quicker it wears out. That's difficult to believe, but so are a lot of
things. -Dereck Williamson
Peter Ward
May 24, 2012, 6:21:49 AM5/24/12
to
BillT...@invalid.com says...
Is that what the kids are calling nowadays?
--
Peter, from outside the asylum
I'm an alien
email: usenet at peterward dot adsl24 dot co dot uk
http://blowinsmoke.wordpress.com/
Ok, that settles it. I'm going to have a drink right now.
- Jesper Lauridsen
--
Peter, from outside the asylum
I'm an alien
email: usenet at peterward dot adsl24 dot co dot uk
http://blowinsmoke.wordpress.com/
Ok, that settles it. I'm going to have a drink right now.
- Jesper Lauridsen
Boron Elgar
May 24, 2012, 6:49:44 AM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
<mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
snip.
Boron
<mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
snip.
>I've seen plenty of dogs riding in the open beds of pickup trucks
>zipping down highways at 65 mph or more; all of them displayed behaviors
>I associate more with "having a blast" than "being scared shitless." I'm
>inclined to credit the Romneys when they assert that Seamus generally
>enjoyed riding in the carrier on top of the station wagon: it seems like
>the sort of thing an Irish setter would enjoy.
>
>No one ever seems to bring up the fact that the Romneys brought Seamus
>on the trip with them because they didn't want to board him in a kennel
>for two weeks. In exchange for riding on top of the car for several
>hours in each direction, Seamus got to be with his family at their
>summer cottage in Ontario for two weeks. I've known enough Irish setters
>to believe that even if he was scared during the ride, he got a net
>benefit from not being kenneled.
I agree with you 100%.
>zipping down highways at 65 mph or more; all of them displayed behaviors
>I associate more with "having a blast" than "being scared shitless." I'm
>inclined to credit the Romneys when they assert that Seamus generally
>enjoyed riding in the carrier on top of the station wagon: it seems like
>the sort of thing an Irish setter would enjoy.
>
>No one ever seems to bring up the fact that the Romneys brought Seamus
>on the trip with them because they didn't want to board him in a kennel
>for two weeks. In exchange for riding on top of the car for several
>hours in each direction, Seamus got to be with his family at their
>summer cottage in Ontario for two weeks. I've known enough Irish setters
>to believe that even if he was scared during the ride, he got a net
>benefit from not being kenneled.
>
>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
Yah, here, too.
>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
Boron
Dover Beach
May 24, 2012, 8:30:43 AM5/24/12
to
Mary <mrfea...@aol.com> wrote in
news:09b81e06-26dd-409d...@st3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:
Me three, now that you mention it.
news:09b81e06-26dd-409d...@st3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:
Dover Beach
May 24, 2012, 8:31:47 AM5/24/12
to
Nasti J <njgi...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ffea3272-3240-47ec...@oe8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
Yeah, good question. I don't know, because I don't want to get close
enough to her to find out, you know?
news:ffea3272-3240-47ec...@oe8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com:
enough to her to find out, you know?
Dover Beach
May 24, 2012, 8:34:30 AM5/24/12
to
"art...@yahoo.com" <art...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:aa13d1b0-339e-4dff...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:
> Every so often I hear about people who are "Saints" in some way, but
> in person are very difficult to deal with*. She might be like that. I
> would imagine you would have to be tough to deal with the sort of
> people you have to deal with in saving child prostitutes (not to
> mention the kids themselves, who may not always be angelic).
>
> *I can't recall meeting anybody like this though. I try to avoid
> people who take the "Army" in "Salvation Army too literally.
>
Yeah, Mother Teresa was reputedly not all that pleasant. But then a lot
of people think the work she did was problematic as well.
news:aa13d1b0-339e-4dff...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:
> Every so often I hear about people who are "Saints" in some way, but
> in person are very difficult to deal with*. She might be like that. I
> would imagine you would have to be tough to deal with the sort of
> people you have to deal with in saving child prostitutes (not to
> mention the kids themselves, who may not always be angelic).
>
> *I can't recall meeting anybody like this though. I try to avoid
> people who take the "Army" in "Salvation Army too literally.
>
of people think the work she did was problematic as well.
Dover Beach
May 24, 2012, 8:40:14 AM5/24/12
to
BillT...@invalid.com wrote in
news:kvorr7hiao99kt7s8...@4ax.com:
V. doesn't have the evil youthful behavior to compensate for.
news:kvorr7hiao99kt7s8...@4ax.com:
Barbara
May 24, 2012, 9:21:47 AM5/24/12
to
>I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
>certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>a cynic, though.
As a tangent to this, I think as some people "mature", they learn how
>certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>a cynic, though.
to disguise, or dress-up, traits that are anti-social or
not-quite-acceptable. But if you look closely (or have known them for
a while), you can see through the veneer.
--
Barbara
Mikko Peltoniemi
May 24, 2012, 10:41:30 AM5/24/12
to
On 5/23/2012 12:43 AM, Veronique wrote:
> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
> a cynic, though.
Sure, you could even go as far as saying that even if they don't get
> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
> a cynic, though.
the recognition, people still do good things in order to feel good
about themselves, and not just for the sake of doing good things.
Either way, I don't think in the end it matters why people do good
things, even if it's for selfish reasons. As long as the good things
get done.
--
My Flickr Page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25892068@N07/
Lee Ayrton
May 24, 2012, 11:03:38 AM5/24/12
to
On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:32 -0700, Veronique wrote:
> On May 22, 5:47 pm, Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote
>> innews:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
>> >> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
>> >> rat bastard to decent human being?
>>
> sexual orientation he didn't approve of, and cutting off his hair.
That was what I had in mind when I posted the above.
> On May 22, 5:47 pm, Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lee Ayrton <layr...@panix.com> wrote
>> innews:jphb6p$9e$4...@reader1.panix.com:
>> >> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from
>> >> rat bastard to decent human being?
>>
>> > Let the sidelong glances at Romney begin!
>>
>> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
>> I'm not forgiving him.
>
> He was over 12 when he orchestrated holding down a fellow student whose
>>
>> How old was he when he put the dog on the car roof? If he was over 12,
>> I'm not forgiving him.
>
> sexual orientation he didn't approve of, and cutting off his hair.
That was what I had in mind when I posted the above.
Greg Goss
May 24, 2012, 11:38:36 AM5/24/12
to
to meddle in people's lives can be believably directed into saving
child prostitutes. Finding a socially acceptable way for misfits to
be useful is a sign of a healthy society.
She might still be a bitch to hang around with, but she can be useful
to society.
--
I used to own a mind like a steel trap.
Perhaps if I'd specified a brass one, it
wouldn't have rusted like this.
N Jill Marsh
May 24, 2012, 11:42:29 AM5/24/12
to
>Veronique <veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:16e6c444-edc8-405a...@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On May 22, 9:17 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote
>>> innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
>>> > Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It
>>> > may not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
>>> > unforgiveable.
>>>
>>> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
>>> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that
>>> > point you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>>>
>>> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
>>> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is
>>> dependent upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can
>>> literally be scared shitless.
I guess, depending upon how one phrases it. I don't know why it's
>news:16e6c444-edc8-405a...@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On May 22, 9:17 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote
>>> innews:a22ua4...@mid.individual.net:
>>> > Lots of people do stupid things without thinking them through. It
>>> > may not indicate someone you want as president, but it's not
>>> > unforgiveable.
>>>
>>> > It's putting the dog BACK onto the roof after washing down the
>>> > terror-driven diarrhea that it becomes unforgiveable. By that
>>> > point you realize that "there's something wrong here."
>>>
>>> Of course, no one actually knows whether the dog's diarrhea was
>>> "terror-driven." The whole silly foofaraw about poor Seamus is
>>> dependent upon the anthropomorphic assumption that a dog can
>>> literally be scared shitless.
anthropomorphic to observe that many dogs do defecate in reaction to
situations that provoke fear- or anxiety-like behaviours. It's even
more common with coyotes. I suppose if one wants to split hairs then
it's anthropomorphic to ascribe any emotions to anything that can't
communicate them directly, but I don't really have a problem with
attributing emotions like fear to other living creatures, it only
becomes anthropomorphic if one assumes that emotion is expressed
similarly to a human's expression of the same emotion. (E.g., that
chameleon is "smiling", thus it's "happy.")
>> Dogs don't experience fear? Dogs don't have physiological reactions to
>> fear? They simply exhibit "fear-like" behaviors? What?
accurate, since we can't ask dogs what they are feeling, but they do
exhibit a spectrum of behaviours in reaction to stimuli that they
otherwise try to avoid - that is, stuff that they are scared of. One
of the things they do is to shit.
>If I questioned the belief that someone can be scared so badly that
>their hair turns white overnight, you'd say I was arguing that people
>don't experience fear? That they don't have physiological reactions to
>fear? The answers are no and no, respectively. So why the hostility? Is
>it because I don't take the media's spin on the Seamus Incident
>seriously, or is it because you think I'm a jerk and consequently don't
>bother to pay attention to what I've actually written? Well, news flash:
>I *am* a jerk. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.
>
>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
stimuli.
>Ann Romney says
>Seamus got the shits after eating some turkey that had been left out on
>the counter, which may or may not be true, but is at least as plausible,
>if not more so - in my experience, when a dog or a cat has bowel
>troubles, the most likely cause is something the critter ate, and in my
>experience both dogs and cats are more than happy to eat things that
>will cause vomiting and/or diarrhea later.
experiencing a painful, long term stimulus that that dog finds
noxious, fearful, what ever.
>I've seen plenty of dogs riding in the open beds of pickup trucks
>zipping down highways at 65 mph or more; all of them displayed behaviors
>I associate more with "having a blast" than "being scared shitless." I'm
>inclined to credit the Romneys when they assert that Seamus generally
>enjoyed riding in the carrier on top of the station wagon: it seems like
>the sort of thing an Irish setter would enjoy.
where absolutely shit scared of the car or rushing air. None had bad
experiences, it truly is something very individual to the animal.
>No one ever seems to bring up the fact that the Romneys brought Seamus
>on the trip with them because they didn't want to board him in a kennel
>for two weeks. In exchange for riding on top of the car for several
>hours in each direction, Seamus got to be with his family at their
>summer cottage in Ontario for two weeks. I've known enough Irish setters
>to believe that even if he was scared during the ride, he got a net
>benefit from not being kenneled.
>
>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
--
"You always know after you are two. Two is the beginning of the end"
Kevin
May 24, 2012, 1:35:53 PM5/24/12
to
stone bitch, I can't be in the room with this woman for more than
about two minutes. And she uses her pain-in-the ass bullying
domineering social skills to teach remedial math, fairly effectively,
to way-left-behind kids at a junior college (not the one at which I am
currently teaching, in case any of my co-workers ever find this). So,
is she still a pain in the ass? Sure. But, I mean, what are you
supposed to do if you find you're a domineering bitch, what if that's
what you've got to work with? You could work in an office or stay
home and make everyone you know miserable, or you can find a place
were your otherwise repulsive urges are useful.
Kevin
May 24, 2012, 2:15:24 PM5/24/12
to
>So I'm looking at Facebook, and I'm looking at the profile and wall of
>this colossal bitch from junior high and high school. Our last names
>start with the same initial, so we were sometimes shoved together in
>seating arrangements. She was incredibly mean. I could recite some of
>the stuff she said to me, but it wasn't very clever or original. She
>had a difficult home life, but so did I, and I didn't say a quarter of
>the shit she said.
>
>Now she runs a non-profit enterprise in Costa Rica saving child
>prostitutes. She adopted Russian orphans (now grown.) She seems to be a
>pretty hard-core Christian, which she most definitely was not in high
>school. She was tough as nails and mean as a scorpion in junior high. There
>is no evidence in any of the material online about her or by her that she
>has made remarks about an individual's body odor lately.
>
>this colossal bitch from junior high and high school. Our last names
>start with the same initial, so we were sometimes shoved together in
>seating arrangements. She was incredibly mean. I could recite some of
>the stuff she said to me, but it wasn't very clever or original. She
>had a difficult home life, but so did I, and I didn't say a quarter of
>the shit she said.
>
>Now she runs a non-profit enterprise in Costa Rica saving child
>prostitutes. She adopted Russian orphans (now grown.) She seems to be a
>pretty hard-core Christian, which she most definitely was not in high
>school. She was tough as nails and mean as a scorpion in junior high. There
>is no evidence in any of the material online about her or by her that she
>has made remarks about an individual's body odor lately.
>
>I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>bastard to decent human being?
No. But sometimes I run into junior high kids who have what I think
>bastard to decent human being?
of as prenaturally sharp social tools, sort of like they're waving a
razor blade around in a room full of kids armed with pool noodles.
It's not that they don't intend to hurt other people, they do, but the
point is I think to see how the tools work, the carving up is as much
about how to carve as it is about the victim. Eventually they lose
the urge to cause carnage and go off to do something else, and
everyone else grows up and they're not so prenaturally armed anymore.
I'm never sure how to put this on a good/bad scale, but I don't think
they become better people, they just lose interest in youthful sadism.
--
Kevin
BillT...@invalid.com
May 24, 2012, 5:22:35 PM5/24/12
to
Mark Steese
May 24, 2012, 7:11:30 PM5/24/12
to
BillT...@invalid.com wrote in
news:kj9tr79isaflhc0ad...@4ax.com:
a. bitchade
b. please
c. slap
d. your mom
--
It can be hard, sometimes, to come home to Van Nuys. -Sandra Tsing Loh
news:kj9tr79isaflhc0ad...@4ax.com:
b. please
c. slap
d. your mom
--
It can be hard, sometimes, to come home to Van Nuys. -Sandra Tsing Loh
N Jill Marsh
May 24, 2012, 7:29:28 PM5/24/12
to
years ago, specifically sought out this personality type. They can be
very effective with the right support and environment.
nj"good job"m
Les Albert
May 24, 2012, 7:33:11 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 19:29:28 -0400, N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com>
Why is that personality type effective for students at risk?
Les
Les
N Jill Marsh
May 24, 2012, 7:32:25 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 13:15:24 -0500, Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
>No. But sometimes I run into junior high kids who have what I think
>of as prenaturally sharp social tools, sort of like they're waving a
>razor blade around in a room full of kids armed with pool noodles.
>It's not that they don't intend to hurt other people, they do, but the
>point is I think to see how the tools work, the carving up is as much
>about how to carve as it is about the victim. Eventually they lose
>the urge to cause carnage and go off to do something else, and
>everyone else grows up and they're not so prenaturally armed anymore.
>I'm never sure how to put this on a good/bad scale, but I don't think
>they become better people, they just lose interest in youthful sadism.
Wow, that describes perfectly a person I went to school with.
>No. But sometimes I run into junior high kids who have what I think
>of as prenaturally sharp social tools, sort of like they're waving a
>razor blade around in a room full of kids armed with pool noodles.
>It's not that they don't intend to hurt other people, they do, but the
>point is I think to see how the tools work, the carving up is as much
>about how to carve as it is about the victim. Eventually they lose
>the urge to cause carnage and go off to do something else, and
>everyone else grows up and they're not so prenaturally armed anymore.
>I'm never sure how to put this on a good/bad scale, but I don't think
>they become better people, they just lose interest in youthful sadism.
Recently, they contacted me and asked me to contact their most usual
victim, because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been
like, and desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
When I communicated this, Victim got a smile on their face just like
the Mona Lisa, and pointed out that making Apologist feel better had
stopped being their job some decades previously.
nj"had to agree"m
Lee Ayrton
May 24, 2012, 7:58:17 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 19:32:25 -0400, N Jill Marsh wrote:
> Wow, that describes perfectly a person I went to school with. Recently,
> they contacted me and asked me to contact their most usual victim,
> because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been like, and
> desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
>
> When I communicated this, Victim got a smile on their face just like the
> Mona Lisa, and pointed out that making Apologist feel better had stopped
> being their job some decades previously.
While I appreciate the cosmic justice in this, I am left sad that no one
> Wow, that describes perfectly a person I went to school with. Recently,
> they contacted me and asked me to contact their most usual victim,
> because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been like, and
> desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
>
> When I communicated this, Victim got a smile on their face just like the
> Mona Lisa, and pointed out that making Apologist feel better had stopped
> being their job some decades previously.
learns anything useful from the outcome.
Mikko Peltoniemi
May 24, 2012, 8:15:54 PM5/24/12
to
On 5/24/2012 7:32 PM, N Jill Marsh wrote:
> victim, because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been
> like, and desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
You know, I've been thinking about this sort of thing a lot lately,
> victim, because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been
> like, and desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
and in theory this is how I want to be: I will not tolerate
offensive behavior. And if someone will act offensively, I
will distance myself from them. BUT. If someone who has been offensive
before asks for forgiveness, and promises change, they will always get
another chance.
We'll see how that works out in practice.
N Jill Marsh
May 24, 2012, 8:57:13 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:33:11 -0700, Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com>
Two things:
1) Not so much for the students, but having a really driven, refuse to
take no for an answer personality combined with the skin of a
rhinoceros was more or less required to do the job they had to do
successfully. Schools are difficult places, and they were shaking up
more than one established system and attitudes.
2) A lot of disengaged students really respond to caring adults that
just don't take not for an answer and who can't be offended or put off
because they have the skin of a rhino. Not all students, but a lot of
them, especially those who have given up on themselves.
1) Not so much for the students, but having a really driven, refuse to
take no for an answer personality combined with the skin of a
rhinoceros was more or less required to do the job they had to do
successfully. Schools are difficult places, and they were shaking up
more than one established system and attitudes.
2) A lot of disengaged students really respond to caring adults that
just don't take not for an answer and who can't be offended or put off
because they have the skin of a rhino. Not all students, but a lot of
them, especially those who have given up on themselves.
Peter Ward
May 24, 2012, 9:00:30 PM5/24/12
to
Mikko Peltoniemi says...
by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
--
Peter, from outside the asylum
I'm an alien
email: usenet at peterward dot adsl24 dot co dot uk
http://blowinsmoke.wordpress.com/
Literacy steps aside when marketing enters the room
- R.H. Draney
>
> On 5/24/2012 7:32 PM, N Jill Marsh wrote:
>
> > victim, because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been
> > like, and desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
>
> You know, I've been thinking about this sort of thing a lot lately,
> and in theory this is how I want to be: I will not tolerate
> offensive behavior. And if someone will act offensively, I
> will distance myself from them. BUT. If someone who has been offensive
> before asks for forgiveness, and promises change, they will always get
> another chance.
>
> We'll see how that works out in practice.
It is my general experience that giving people another chance is taken
> On 5/24/2012 7:32 PM, N Jill Marsh wrote:
>
> > victim, because they really, really, finally realized what they'd been
> > like, and desperately and sincerely wanted to apologize.
>
> You know, I've been thinking about this sort of thing a lot lately,
> and in theory this is how I want to be: I will not tolerate
> offensive behavior. And if someone will act offensively, I
> will distance myself from them. BUT. If someone who has been offensive
> before asks for forgiveness, and promises change, they will always get
> another chance.
>
> We'll see how that works out in practice.
by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
--
Peter, from outside the asylum
I'm an alien
email: usenet at peterward dot adsl24 dot co dot uk
http://blowinsmoke.wordpress.com/
- R.H. Draney
N Jill Marsh
May 24, 2012, 9:01:09 PM5/24/12
to
vindication of an apology from a previous tormentor to get over the
torment, and Apologist learned that, to this day, not everything is
going to go your way - you can apologize, but no one is required to
listen to it. If you're doing it because of your wish for
forgiveness, then you're not doing it for the right reasons.
And to be fair, Apologist took Victim's response really well, and
admitted that while they were disappointed, didn't disagree.
Les Albert
May 24, 2012, 9:01:02 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 20:57:13 -0400, N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com>
Understood. It makes sense. Thanks.
Les
Les
Mikko Peltoniemi
May 24, 2012, 10:05:34 PM5/24/12
to
On 5/24/2012 9:00 PM, Peter Ward wrote:
> It is my general experience that giving people another chance is taken
> by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
That is, of course, a possibility. But at the same time, the people
> It is my general experience that giving people another chance is taken
> by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
willing to carry on the same way probably aren't willing to admit
to any wrongdoing in the first place.
Charles Bishop
May 25, 2012, 12:47:13 AM5/25/12
to
In article <XnsA05BD892...@88.198.244.100>, Mark Steese
<mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip Romney/dog/carrier/car roof)
>
>And even if Seamus *was* terrified (which, he being an Irish setter, I
>tend to doubt), I question the seriousness of anyone who would proclaim
>Romney's behavior "unforgiveable" while turning a blind eye to Obama's
>extrajudicial assassinations. Seamus survived the trip with no ill
>effects: Romney's sister Jane, who adopted Seamus a few years
>afterwards, didn't even know about the incident till she read about it
>in the Boston Globe in 2008.
>
>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>much.
I don't want to turn this any more political than it already is,
especially since I don't know exactly what Obama did (or was supposed to
have done), but. . .
For the moment, I assume he gave orders to kill US citizens that were not
on US soil and were assumed to be helping or aiding or fighting for or
along with people that the US is currently trying to kill. If this is so,
then read on, if it isn't then please fill me in about Obama's e. j. a.'s
mentioned above.
If a US citizen is fighting alongside, or aiding people the US is trying
to kill, I'm not sure I can see a reason not to try to kill the US citizen
as well. I should mention that I'm fuzzy on the aiding or helping. I
think, without having thought it through to a firm conclusion, that a US
citizen should be able to protest US government actions be they monetary
help for foreign governments or war with or against foreign governments,
even if (and maybe especially if) the government actions are popular.
I think US citizens should be allowed to fight for or against foreign
governments if the US is not involved militarily. This is a choice based
on principles (good or bad) and should be allowed. Any US citizen should
be allowed to remain a US citizen, with all the rights.
Where it gets fuzzy for me is when the US is directly involved in a
conflict. Can a US citizen fight for the other side? It could be because
of principles, perhaps the citizen thinks the war is unjust, or because of
loyalities, perhaps the citizen has family there. In that case the should
the citizen be treated worse than any other combatant on the other side?
There would be a sense of betrayal by citizens who didn't fight for the
other side, but there might be some who would see it as a use of
principles.
I didn't serve in the Vietnam war, but I thought it was a huge mistake,
costing lives and material. I wouldn't have fought for the N. Vietnamese
though. But we have an example closer to home: the Civil War. I suspect
members of the Southern Army had reasons of principle, or family, or both
to answer the call to war. For the most part (weasel words because I don't
know the history well enough) they were treated as just enemy soldiers
when the conflict was over.
All this is leading up to the killings that Mark S. refered to. The US
citizen is to be allowed to fight for whomever he chooses, but if he is
targeted as a target of significance (rather than we don't like him
because he's a traitor) then his killing seems justified.
--
charles
<mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip Romney/dog/carrier/car roof)
>
>And even if Seamus *was* terrified (which, he being an Irish setter, I
>tend to doubt), I question the seriousness of anyone who would proclaim
>Romney's behavior "unforgiveable" while turning a blind eye to Obama's
>extrajudicial assassinations. Seamus survived the trip with no ill
>effects: Romney's sister Jane, who adopted Seamus a few years
>afterwards, didn't even know about the incident till she read about it
>in the Boston Globe in 2008.
>
>To care more about an Irish setter with the shits than U.S. citizens
>being murdered by their own government without due process makes no
>sense to me. But I guess people really love dogs. Habeas corpus, not so
>much.
I don't want to turn this any more political than it already is,
especially since I don't know exactly what Obama did (or was supposed to
have done), but. . .
For the moment, I assume he gave orders to kill US citizens that were not
on US soil and were assumed to be helping or aiding or fighting for or
along with people that the US is currently trying to kill. If this is so,
then read on, if it isn't then please fill me in about Obama's e. j. a.'s
mentioned above.
If a US citizen is fighting alongside, or aiding people the US is trying
to kill, I'm not sure I can see a reason not to try to kill the US citizen
as well. I should mention that I'm fuzzy on the aiding or helping. I
think, without having thought it through to a firm conclusion, that a US
citizen should be able to protest US government actions be they monetary
help for foreign governments or war with or against foreign governments,
even if (and maybe especially if) the government actions are popular.
I think US citizens should be allowed to fight for or against foreign
governments if the US is not involved militarily. This is a choice based
on principles (good or bad) and should be allowed. Any US citizen should
be allowed to remain a US citizen, with all the rights.
Where it gets fuzzy for me is when the US is directly involved in a
conflict. Can a US citizen fight for the other side? It could be because
of principles, perhaps the citizen thinks the war is unjust, or because of
loyalities, perhaps the citizen has family there. In that case the should
the citizen be treated worse than any other combatant on the other side?
There would be a sense of betrayal by citizens who didn't fight for the
other side, but there might be some who would see it as a use of
principles.
I didn't serve in the Vietnam war, but I thought it was a huge mistake,
costing lives and material. I wouldn't have fought for the N. Vietnamese
though. But we have an example closer to home: the Civil War. I suspect
members of the Southern Army had reasons of principle, or family, or both
to answer the call to war. For the most part (weasel words because I don't
know the history well enough) they were treated as just enemy soldiers
when the conflict was over.
All this is leading up to the killings that Mark S. refered to. The US
citizen is to be allowed to fight for whomever he chooses, but if he is
targeted as a target of significance (rather than we don't like him
because he's a traitor) then his killing seems justified.
--
charles
Veronique
May 24, 2012, 11:36:39 PM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 7:05 pm, Mikko Peltoniemi <mikko...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/24/2012 9:00 PM, Peter Ward wrote:
>
> > It is my general experience that giving people another chance is taken
> > by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
>
> That is, of course, a possibility. But at the same time, the people
> willing to carry on the same way probably aren't willing to admit
> to any wrongdoing in the first place.
For me, it's a matter of not having enough time to interact with
> On 5/24/2012 9:00 PM, Peter Ward wrote:
>
> > It is my general experience that giving people another chance is taken
> > by them as another chance to carry on exactly the same as before.
>
> That is, of course, a possibility. But at the same time, the people
> willing to carry on the same way probably aren't willing to admit
> to any wrongdoing in the first place.
people I love and care about and want to interact with, never mind
someone who has treated me badly in the past and may or may not have
changed. Even if they are goodness incarnate, there are still many
other people who haven't treated me badly whom I don't get enough time
with as it is.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Charles Bishop
May 25, 2012, 1:09:38 AM5/25/12
to
In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
--
chgarles
wrote:
[snip]
>
>>If I questioned the belief that someone can be scared so badly that
>>their hair turns white overnight, you'd say I was arguing that people
>>don't experience fear? That they don't have physiological reactions to
>>fear? The answers are no and no, respectively. So why the hostility? Is
>>it because I don't take the media's spin on the Seamus Incident
>>seriously, or is it because you think I'm a jerk and consequently don't
>>bother to pay attention to what I've actually written? Well, news flash:
>>I *am* a jerk. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.
>>
>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>
>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>stimuli.
[snip]
>>If I questioned the belief that someone can be scared so badly that
>>their hair turns white overnight, you'd say I was arguing that people
>>don't experience fear? That they don't have physiological reactions to
>>fear? The answers are no and no, respectively. So why the hostility? Is
>>it because I don't take the media's spin on the Seamus Incident
>>seriously, or is it because you think I'm a jerk and consequently don't
>>bother to pay attention to what I've actually written? Well, news flash:
>>I *am* a jerk. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.
>>
>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>
>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>stimuli.
But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
--
chgarles
Veronique
May 25, 2012, 12:52:33 AM5/25/12
to
On May 24, 10:09 pm, ctbis...@earthlink.net (Charles Bishop) wrote:
> In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gqmk4hjj6lpusq56...@4ax.com>, njma...@gmail.com
Yes. Mammals (including human animals) can experience diarrhea as a
physiological side effect of fear.
Here's a link:
http://www.petmd.com/cat/conditions/behavioral/c_ct_fear_phobia_anxiety#.T78N_cX-55c
"Classic signs of sympathetic autonomic nervous system activity due to
stress, including diarrhea that may be diagnosed as inflammatory bowel
disease or irritable bowel syndrome"
Here's another:
http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/guide/dog-diarrhea-causes-treatment
"What Causes Diarrhea in Dogs? - Stress"
Ask your vet whether fear can cause stress-related diarrhea in pets.
V."cats and horses as well as dogs and humans"
--
Veronique Chez
> In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gqmk4hjj6lpusq56...@4ax.com>, njma...@gmail.com
physiological side effect of fear.
Here's a link:
http://www.petmd.com/cat/conditions/behavioral/c_ct_fear_phobia_anxiety#.T78N_cX-55c
"Classic signs of sympathetic autonomic nervous system activity due to
stress, including diarrhea that may be diagnosed as inflammatory bowel
disease or irritable bowel syndrome"
Here's another:
http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/guide/dog-diarrhea-causes-treatment
"What Causes Diarrhea in Dogs? - Stress"
Ask your vet whether fear can cause stress-related diarrhea in pets.
V."cats and horses as well as dogs and humans"
--
Veronique Chez
N Jill Marsh
May 25, 2012, 8:44:16 PM5/25/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 21:09:38 -0800, ctbi...@earthlink.net (Charles
Bishop) wrote:
>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[snip]
Bishop) wrote:
>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>
>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>stimuli.
>[snip]
>
>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>
>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
Diarrhea can also be caused by too swift transit times through the
>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>
>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>stimuli.
>[snip]
>
>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>
>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
bowels. That can be caused by any number of things, including certain
types of stressors.
nj"racer shits"m
Boron Elgar
May 25, 2012, 9:31:54 PM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 20:44:16 -0400, N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com>
had even a smidgeon of turkey. It was like canine cholera.
It took us until her second Thanksgiving to figure this out
definitively.
Boron
wrote:
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 21:09:38 -0800, ctbi...@earthlink.net (Charles
>Bishop) wrote:
>
>>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>>
>>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>>stimuli.
>>[snip]
>>
>>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>>
>>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
>
>Diarrhea can also be caused by too swift transit times through the
>bowels. That can be caused by any number of things, including certain
>types of stressors.
>
>nj"racer shits"m
The ex-Bichon used to get damned near the bloody flux and worse if she
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 21:09:38 -0800, ctbi...@earthlink.net (Charles
>Bishop) wrote:
>
>>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>>
>>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>>stimuli.
>>[snip]
>>
>>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>>
>>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
>
>Diarrhea can also be caused by too swift transit times through the
>bowels. That can be caused by any number of things, including certain
>types of stressors.
>
>nj"racer shits"m
had even a smidgeon of turkey. It was like canine cholera.
It took us until her second Thanksgiving to figure this out
definitively.
Boron
Charles Wm. Dimmick
May 27, 2012, 6:54:24 AM5/27/12
to
On 5/22/2012 7:29 PM, Dover Beach wrote:
> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
> bastard to decent human being?
George Wallace
> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
> bastard to decent human being?
Charles Wm. Dimmick
May 27, 2012, 7:53:23 AM5/27/12
to
On 5/24/2012 9:21 AM, Barbara wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Veronique
> <veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
>> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>> a cynic, though.
>
> As a tangent to this, I think as some people "mature", they learn how
> to disguise, or dress-up, traits that are anti-social or
> not-quite-acceptable. But if you look closely (or have known them for
> a while), you can see through the veneer.
>
Also, once people start drifting into old age, which for some people is
> On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Veronique
> <veroniq...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a theory(!) (you know this was coming too, didn't you?) that
>> certain narcissistic controlling personality types can be drawn into
>> apparently selfless ventures like saving child prostitutes, because it
>> still means having control over the lives of other people while still
>> getting those egos strokes because, "You do such wonderful work!" I'm
>> a cynic, though.
>
> As a tangent to this, I think as some people "mature", they learn how
> to disguise, or dress-up, traits that are anti-social or
> not-quite-acceptable. But if you look closely (or have known them for
> a while), you can see through the veneer.
>
as young as 50 and for others not until they are over 75, they tend to
reveal more and more what they are truly like underneath. Some start
becoming sweeter and sweeter and some start becoming nastier and nastier.
Charles
N Jill Marsh
May 27, 2012, 10:54:16 AM5/27/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 21:31:54 -0400, Boron Elgar
<boron...@hootmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2012 20:44:16 -0400, N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 21:09:38 -0800, ctbi...@earthlink.net (Charles
>>Bishop) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>>>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>>>
>>>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>>>stimuli.
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>>>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>>>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>>>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>>>
>>>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
>>
>>Diarrhea can also be caused by too swift transit times through the
>>bowels. That can be caused by any number of things, including certain
>>types of stressors.
>
<boron...@hootmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2012 20:44:16 -0400, N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 21:09:38 -0800, ctbi...@earthlink.net (Charles
>>Bishop) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <p2lsr71caovhfa1gq...@4ax.com>, njm...@gmail.com
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:54:10 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese
>>>><mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>>The question is not whether a dog can be scared but whether a dog can be
>>>>>so scared as to experience uncontrollable diarrhea.
>>>>
>>>>Okay, yes, a dog can experience that in response to highly negative
>>>>stimuli.
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>>>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>>>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>>>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
>>>
>>>I'll defer to your expertise and or experience.
>>
>>Diarrhea can also be caused by too swift transit times through the
>>bowels. That can be caused by any number of things, including certain
>>types of stressors.
>
>The ex-Bichon used to get damned near the bloody flux and worse if she
>had even a smidgeon of turkey. It was like canine cholera.
>
>It took us until her second Thanksgiving to figure this out
>definitively.
Probably an allergy to the meat protein. My last dog had issues with
>had even a smidgeon of turkey. It was like canine cholera.
>
>It took us until her second Thanksgiving to figure this out
>definitively.
chicken and beef, but could suck up anything else with all the
joyousness of a Labrador on prednisone.
nj"because, um, she was"m
Greg Goss
May 27, 2012, 11:11:23 AM5/27/12
to
Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
There are three areas of concern when deciding who to vote for. You
>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
analyze the proposed policies and hope that they'll stick to them once
elected. You analyze questions of character. And you analyze
capabilities.
Bush II's party-boy days count; Obama's Law Review editor, his
"interceptions", and his support for the controversial professor
count; and Romney's assault on the guy with different hair, and his
treatment of a dog count; Clinton's draft-dodging and instinctive lie
(corrected the next morning) about inhaling count. They all help
illustrate character.
Greg Goss
May 27, 2012, 11:18:34 AM5/27/12
to
2002 when Trent Lott endorsed them. But from everything I read at the
time, Thurmond had moved beyond the racism by the early seventies.
Kevin
May 27, 2012, 1:22:05 PM5/27/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 09:11:23 -0600, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
>
>There are three areas of concern when deciding who to vote for. You
>analyze the proposed policies and hope that they'll stick to them once
>elected. You analyze questions of character. And you analyze
>capabilities.
>
>Bush II's party-boy days count; Obama's Law Review editor, his
>"interceptions", and his support for the controversial professor
>count; and Romney's assault on the guy with different hair, and his
>treatment of a dog count; Clinton's draft-dodging and instinctive lie
>(corrected the next morning) about inhaling count. They all help
>illustrate character.
I agree with this, with the addition that it's fair to look at past
>Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to vote
>>against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
>
>There are three areas of concern when deciding who to vote for. You
>analyze the proposed policies and hope that they'll stick to them once
>elected. You analyze questions of character. And you analyze
>capabilities.
>
>Bush II's party-boy days count; Obama's Law Review editor, his
>"interceptions", and his support for the controversial professor
>count; and Romney's assault on the guy with different hair, and his
>treatment of a dog count; Clinton's draft-dodging and instinctive lie
>(corrected the next morning) about inhaling count. They all help
>illustrate character.
legislative actions for answers to both questions of policy and
character. But yes, character has to count, at some point this guy
will face problems we can't anticipate. At that point we bought the
man, not a policy package.
Barbara
May 27, 2012, 1:44:04 PM5/27/12
to
similar effect on one's personality. If the person is nice, they tend
to become nicer and more generous, for instance.
I wouldn't know.
--
Barbara
Mark Steese
May 27, 2012, 2:08:47 PM5/27/12
to
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in news:a2euug...@mid.individual.net:
> "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>>On 5/22/2012 7:29 PM, Dover Beach wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>> bastard to decent human being?
>>
>>George Wallace
>
> Strom Thurmond's early (1948) racist policies became a media storm in
> 2002 when Trent Lott endorsed them. But from everything I read at the
> time, Thurmond had moved beyond the racism by the early seventies.
Or he was shrewd enough to keep quiet about it so he could keep getting
reelected.
--
The "Kinkade Glow" could be seen as derived in spirit from the "lustrous,
pearly mist" that Mark Twain had derided in the Bierstadt paintings, and,
the level of execution to one side, there are certain unsettling
similarities between the two painters. -Joan Didion
> "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>>On 5/22/2012 7:29 PM, Dover Beach wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not going to friend her, but do you know anyone who went from rat
>>> bastard to decent human being?
>>
>>George Wallace
>
> Strom Thurmond's early (1948) racist policies became a media storm in
> 2002 when Trent Lott endorsed them. But from everything I read at the
> time, Thurmond had moved beyond the racism by the early seventies.
reelected.
--
The "Kinkade Glow" could be seen as derived in spirit from the "lustrous,
pearly mist" that Mark Twain had derided in the Bierstadt paintings, and,
the level of execution to one side, there are certain unsettling
similarities between the two painters. -Joan Didion
Mark Steese
May 27, 2012, 2:33:47 PM5/27/12
to
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in
news:a2euh1...@mid.individual.net:
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>And in conclusion, let me just say that Mitt Romney's politics concern
>>me a lot more, and provide substantially more compelling reasons to
>>vote against him, than some stupid fucking story about his dog.
>
> There are three areas of concern when deciding who to vote for.
> You analyze the proposed policies and hope that they'll stick to them
> once elected. You analyze questions of character. And you analyze
> capabilities.
know is fatuous even when one has better information than news reports
to rely on. It's sufficiently difficult to justify judging the character
of people one *does* know.
Same goes with analyzing capabilities: it's useless speculation. What
was there in Lincoln's background to suggest that he could be an
effective leader during a civil war? What in Eisenhower's background
indicated that he would order the National Guard to Little Rock to
enforce desegregation? What in Kennedy's background would have alerted
the electorate to the fact that he would try to arrange for the
assassination of Castro?
It may be shallow of me, but all I care about are the candidates'
political positions. I vote for whoever's stated positions are the least
repugnant to me; by a startling coincidence, that person is always the
Democratic candidate. As for hoping the candidate will stick to those
stated positions if elected, well, I'm naïve, but I'm not *that* naïve:
I'll settle for the fact that the candidate acknowledged that those
positions exist - even that puts him one up on the other guy.
> Bush II's party-boy days count; Obama's Law Review editor, his
> "interceptions", and his support for the controversial professor
> count; and Romney's assault on the guy with different hair, and his
> treatment of a dog count; Clinton's draft-dodging and instinctive lie
> (corrected the next morning) about inhaling count. They all help
> illustrate character.
dog was unforgiveable but Obama's authorizing the murder of U.S.
citizens was no reason to reject him because Romney would just do the
same thing. It's abundantly clear that you support Obama for exactly the
same reason I do - you find his stated positions somewhat less offensive
than Romney's, and you (like me) are willing to forgive what he's
actually done for fear there will a worse come in his stead. Of course,
you're fortunate in that you can support Obama without worrying about
what it means to actually *vote* for the scumbag.
N Jill Marsh
May 27, 2012, 5:01:43 PM5/27/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 12:44:04 -0500, Barbara
<que.barbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Some celebrity claimed that getting rich quickly tends to have a
>similar effect on one's personality. If the person is nice, they tend
>to become nicer and more generous, for instance.
>
>I wouldn't know.
I watched a documentary on people that won the Powerball recently, and
<que.barbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Some celebrity claimed that getting rich quickly tends to have a
>similar effect on one's personality. If the person is nice, they tend
>to become nicer and more generous, for instance.
>
>I wouldn't know.
one of the people on it, not a Lottery Winner, said that giving
someone of modest means a huge amount of money was just like putting
MiracleGro on one's personality. Including the flaws.
I thought it very apt, and it is a lot more complicated than just
being "nice," for example, it might also showcase that you're nice but
profligate, or nice but don't deal with stress well, etc.
c
Lee Ayrton
May 27, 2012, 8:40:41 PM5/27/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 07:53:23 -0400, Charles Wm. Dimmick wrote:
> Also, once people start drifting into old age, which for some people is
> as young as 50 and for others not until they are over 75, they tend to
> reveal more and more what they are truly like underneath. Some start
> becoming sweeter and sweeter and some start becoming nastier and
> nastier.
There must be statistical outliers, since my mother started marching
> Also, once people start drifting into old age, which for some people is
> as young as 50 and for others not until they are over 75, they tend to
> reveal more and more what they are truly like underneath. Some start
> becoming sweeter and sweeter and some start becoming nastier and
> nastier.
towards nastier and nastier at about age 30.
Mary
May 27, 2012, 8:53:17 PM5/27/12
to
his generation for most of his life - assertive, certain of his own
rectitude, etc. - became milder as his Alzheimer's kicked in. He agrees
with anything suggested by someone he trusts, and his absolute favorite
thing these days is family photos.
I went to see him on Friday with a new photo and he got all teary.
Mary
D.F. Manno
May 28, 2012, 11:57:28 PM5/28/12
to
"Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
bit strong.
--
D.F. Manno
Charles Wm. Dimmick
May 29, 2012, 5:14:49 PM5/29/12
to
it. But are you certain it wasn't just early onset of senility?
Charles
Xho Jingleheimerschmidt
May 28, 2012, 11:29:23 PM5/28/12
to
didn't know whether to admire them or despise them, but either way
didn't want a career with them.
Xho
--
And grad school didn't repeat, but it did rhyme.
BillT...@invalid.com
May 29, 2012, 10:13:18 PM5/29/12
to
>But would the result be diarrhea rather than just shitting, eliminating
>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
Large.
>waste so as to be ready for fight or flight? I though diarrhea was caused
>by something that interferes with the takeup of water by the small(?)
>intestine and so would be an unlikely result.
BillT...@invalid.com
May 29, 2012, 10:15:48 PM5/29/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 07:53:23 -0400, "Charles Wm. Dimmick"
<cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>Also, once people start drifting into old age, which for some people is
>as young as 50 and for others not until they are over 75, they tend to
>reveal more and more what they are truly like underneath. Some start
>becoming sweeter and sweeter and some start becoming nastier and nastier.
Is _that_ why I didn't mind herding babies!?
>
>Also, once people start drifting into old age, which for some people is
>as young as 50 and for others not until they are over 75, they tend to
>reveal more and more what they are truly like underneath. Some start
>becoming sweeter and sweeter and some start becoming nastier and nastier.
Lee Ayrton
May 30, 2012, 12:23:34 PM5/30/12
to
symptomatic rather than causal (Did you meet her once, at my house?).
The one I mentioned above is the biological one.
The person formerly known as TLM (even though she's still L and still M)
was in Boston for the weekend. She and I had a nice walk, lunch and an
early evening with her parents. One of her immediate family is
descending into something that involves short-term memory. It is
terribly, terribly sad to see, and difficult for the rest of the family.
I so wanted to say something comforting, and there simply are no words.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
Jun 1, 2012, 8:10:08 AM6/1/12
to
On 5/30/2012 12:23 PM, Lee Ayrton wrote:
> The one with the dogs is my step-mother the second, and I count them as
> symptomatic rather than causal (Did you meet her once, at my house?).
> The one I mentioned above is the biological one.
>
> The person formerly known as TLM (even though she's still L and still M)
> was in Boston for the weekend. She and I had a nice walk, lunch and an
> early evening with her parents.
Thanks for the corrections and updates.
> The one with the dogs is my step-mother the second, and I count them as
> symptomatic rather than causal (Did you meet her once, at my house?).
> The one I mentioned above is the biological one.
>
> The person formerly known as TLM (even though she's still L and still M)
> was in Boston for the weekend. She and I had a nice walk, lunch and an
> early evening with her parents.
> One of her immediate family is
> descending into something that involves short-term memory. It is
> terribly, terribly sad to see, and difficult for the rest of the family.
>
> I so wanted to say something comforting, and there simply are no words.
0 new messages