~Victimology;~ Ayn or Werner or ElRon?

[elle...@gmail.com]

...Or some other unholy communion with one of the champions of personal ~responsibility?~ Where did Mitt get his conviction that those of wealth and privilege, those of status and power, those of influence and ~leadership,~ get to lord it over the rest of us "moochers" and "parasites" and "victims?" At what point, did he of Mormon "social responsibility," turn into a scold who denounces and dismisses anyone who isn't in a position to pay for everything he or she needs, (like a $60,000 appendectomy). And how does he square this with the right-wing mandate to eviscerate the unions, deprive workers of any sort of (collective) power, or pay them anything all if they can outsource labor to some third-world country with providing some hapless worker the ability to actually take any sort of ~control~ over his own destiny, let alone pay for any of the goods or services Mitt and his crony "job-creators" deign to provide?

Nope, it's the same old cult-like cult nonsense that would like ~victims~ to go away and hide in the bushes, too ashamed to complain, too intimidated to protest, and likely to blame themselves for any unfortunate event they happen to have brought upon themselves.

What a hoot. It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~

LOLOL...



Ellen

[Tex]

That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
The cult of Thurston Howell III.
Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.

Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
Most Mormons need not apply.
The cult of plutocrats.

[Serena Nordstrup]

If someone oozes a sense of ~responsibility~ it becomes quite easy to
take ~responsibility~ for alienating and insulting citizens and voters

Question: what proportion of the 47% actually have become victims at
some time over the last 80 years?

Ah well, we can view Governor Romney's pronouncements as Divine
Punishment for Yankee/Massachusetts involvement in whaling in the 19th
century...

[elle...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:56 PM UTC-7, Tex wrote:
> That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
>
> The cult of Thurston Howell III.
>
> Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
>
> Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.
>
>
>
> Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
>
> Most Mormons need not apply.
>
> The cult of plutocrats.

Most Mormons will vote in lock-step. They do what they are told to do, whether or not it is in their best interests. Most Mormons are not wealthy, though they aspire to wealth and are constantly instructed that the way to wealth is the Mormon way and wealth, in and of itself, is de facto evidence that one has adhered devoutly and correctly to Mormon "principles" and been "blessed" by God for this fealty.

It's no big mystery that pyramid schemes (cults) thrive in the U.S. -- we've been a petri dish for these things since the beginning of European settlement. "Prosperity" cults have taken over a huge portion of the populace and the Mormon model with the bottom 99% all dutifully tithing without complaint is probably Mitt's model to bring the U.S. into a reflection of Mormon "perfection" for himself and his rich friends.

Most Mormons believe Mitt is the anointed savior of the U.S. Constitution, though they will deny it publicly. It's been referred to as the "White Horse Prophecy." I wonder how they will explain the fact to themselves that the U.S. doesn't want Mormon "salvation." Or that a fellow republican, (G.W.Bush), did more to undermine the Constitution than any other president in history.

Here's an interesting article about the reasons why we shouldn't vote for a Mormon or allow a Mormon any authority over the U.S.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/07/exclusive-brigham-young-s-great-great-granddaughter-on-mormonism-and-mitt-romney.html


Ellen

[Tex]

Thanks for the article.
Lying for the Lord?
OK, that explains Mitten's pathological aversion for the truth.
But how do we explain Paul Ryan?

Thomas Aquinas certainly would not approve.

Seems like a Republican disease.
Sometime they even contradict themselves in mid-sentence, on TV!!!!

Incredible.

[patrick]

On Sep 19, 10:29 pm, Tex <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the article.
> Lying for the Lord?
> OK, that explains Mitten's pathological aversion for the truth.
> But how do we explain Paul Ryan?
>
> Thomas Aquinas certainly would not approve.
>
> Seems like a Republican disease.
> Sometime they even contradict themselves in mid-sentence, on TV!!!!
>
> Incredible.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:38:43 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:56 PM UTC-7, Tex wrote:
>
> > > That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
>
> > > The cult of Thurston Howell III.
>
> > > Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
>
> > > Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.
>
> > > Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
>
> > > Most Mormons need not apply.
>
> > > The cult of plutocrats.
>
> > Most Mormons will vote in lock-step.  They do what they are told to do, whether or not it is in their best interests.  Most Mormons are not wealthy, though they aspire to wealth and are constantly instructed that the way to wealth is the Mormon way and wealth, in and of itself, is de facto evidence that one has adhered devoutly and correctly to Mormon "principles" and been "blessed" by God for this fealty.
>
> > It's no big mystery that pyramid schemes (cults) thrive in the U.S. -- we've been a petri dish for these things since the beginning of European settlement.  "Prosperity" cults have taken over a huge portion of the populace and the Mormon model with the bottom 99% all dutifully tithing without complaint is probably Mitt's model to bring the U.S. into a reflection of Mormon "perfection" for himself and his rich friends.
>
> > Most Mormons believe Mitt is the anointed savior of the U.S. Constitution,  though they will deny it publicly. It's been referred to as the "White Horse Prophecy."  I wonder how they will explain the fact to themselves that the U.S. doesn't want Mormon "salvation."  Or that a fellow republican, (G.W.Bush), did more to undermine the Constitution than any other president in history.
>
> > Here's an interesting article about the reasons why we shouldn't vote for a Mormon or allow a Mormon any authority over the U.S.
>

> >http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/07/exclusive-brigham-yo...

>
> > Ellen
>
> > > On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:08:42 PM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
>
> > > > ...Or some other unholy communion with one of the champions of personal ~responsibility?~  Where did Mitt get his conviction that those of wealth and privilege, those of status and power, those of influence and ~leadership,~ get to lord it over the rest of us "moochers" and "parasites" and "victims?"  At what point, did he of Mormon "social responsibility," turn into a scold who denounces and dismisses anyone who isn't in a position to pay for everything he or she needs, (like a $60,000 appendectomy).  And how does he square this with the right-wing mandate to eviscerate the unions, deprive workers of any sort of (collective) power, or pay them anything all if they can outsource labor to some third-world country with providing some hapless worker the ability to actually take any sort of ~control~ over his own destiny, let alone pay for any of the goods or services Mitt and his crony "job-creators" deign to provide?
>
> > > > Nope, it's the same old cult-like cult nonsense that would like ~victims~ to go away and hide in the bushes, too ashamed to complain, too intimidated to protest, and likely to blame themselves for any unfortunate event they happen to have brought upon themselves.
>
> > > > What a hoot.  It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~
>
> > > > LOLOL...
>
> > > > Ellen

tex do u believe in trickle down brainwashing ?

[patrick]

a simple yes or no with do,

[bentot]

At risk of sounding like ???serena???, is there room for "maybe?".

And, how about trickle up? :)

bentot

[Serena Nordstrup]

On Sep 22, 2:28 pm, bentot <bentot1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:28:57 -0700 (PDT), patrick
>

... a big risk, a bold response. Congratulations!

> And, how about trickle up? :)

Indeed!

> bentot

[patrick]

of course

[Tex]

On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:38:43 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:56 PM UTC-7, Tex wrote:
>
> > That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
>
> >
>
> > The cult of Thurston Howell III.
>
> >
>
> > Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
>
> >
>
> > Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
>
> >
>
> > Most Mormons need not apply.
>
> >
>
> > The cult of plutocrats.
>
>
>
>
>
> Most Mormons will vote in lock-step. They do what they are told to do, whether or not it is in their best interests. Most Mormons are not wealthy, though they aspire to wealth and are constantly instructed that the way to wealth is the Mormon way and wealth, in and of itself, is de facto evidence that one has adhered devoutly and correctly to Mormon "principles" and been "blessed" by God for this fealty.
>
>
>
> It's no big mystery that pyramid schemes (cults) thrive in the U.S. -- we've been a petri dish for these things since the beginning of European settlement. "Prosperity" cults have taken over a huge portion of the populace and the Mormon model with the bottom 99% all dutifully tithing without complaint is probably Mitt's model to bring the U.S. into a reflection of Mormon "perfection" for himself and his rich friends.
>
>
>
> Most Mormons believe Mitt is the anointed savior of the U.S. Constitution, though they will deny it publicly. It's been referred to as the "White Horse Prophecy." I wonder how they will explain the fact to themselves that the U.S. doesn't want Mormon "salvation." Or that a fellow republican, (G.W.Bush), did more to undermine the Constitution than any other president in history.
>
>
>
> Here's an interesting article about the reasons why we shouldn't vote for a Mormon or allow a Mormon any authority over the U.S.
>
>
>
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/07/exclusive-brigham-young-s-great-great-granddaughter-on-mormonism-and-mitt-romney.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Ellen

Not all Mormon's
Here is a former supporter that was at the Democratic convention, with other Mormon's, this year, supporting the President.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gregory-a-prince-phd/mitt-romney-is-not-the-face-of-mormonism_b_1897404.html
>
When the news of Mitt Romney's Florida video broke on Monday evening, I was incensed -- but not for its political implications. His arrogant and out-of-hand dismissal of half the population of this country struck me at a visceral level, for it sullied the religion that he and I share -- the religion for which five generations of my ancestry have lived and sacrificed, the religion whose official mantra is "to take care of the poor and needy throughout the world." My first impulse was to rent an airplane towing a banner: "Mitt Romney is Not the Face of Mormonism!"

I was a supporter of Romney 1.0. That was in late 2007, when we had far more in common. We are both Mormons and we both served foreign missions for our church at the same time, he in France and I in Brazil. Some of my best friends had been some of his best friends for decades. Although I am a registered Democrat, his accomplishments as Governor of Massachusetts appealed to me. I contributed the maximum amount to his early presidential primary bid.

I also became an emissary to him, presenting what I felt was an attractive proposition. Helen Whitney, who had recently completed a four-hour PBS documentary, "The Mormons," was also intrigued with Romney, enough that she asked that I propose to him one hour of national coverage on PBS if he would allow her to interview him only about his religion.

"It's a good religion," she said to me, "but he is hiding from it. He needs to own it."

I delivered the proposal in person. He declined, stating that he and his advisors had concluded that the issue of his religion would simply go away. It didn't, but his candidacy did.

Early in 2008, to my dismay, Romney 1.0 became Romney 2.0 by moving far enough to the right to lose my support. He has kept moving ever farther to the right. He has made this move in a successful attempt to gain the nomination, and in an ongoing attempt to persuade no more than 53 percent of the country that he should be the next President.

The issue of Romney's Mormon faith has never gone away, although its presence has waxed and waned as other issues have come and gone. How -- or if -- he chooses to use his religion as part of his public biography is up to him, but the fact that he is the only Mormon ever to be the nominee for the Presidency of a major political party makes it inevitable that even if people do not judge him because of his religion, they will judge his religion because of him. Given the unfolding news of this week, I regret to say that Mitt Romney is not the face of Mormonism.

Romney 1.0 was that face. Having been a missionary myself, I know the formative power of two years of missionary service. Having served as an assistant to one bishop and four stake presidents -- and Romney served as bishop and stake president -- I know the even greater formative power of those offices. I understand completely what his father George meant when he said, "I am completely the product of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." That face of Mormonism is the one that calls on some of its members, particularly bishops and stake presidents, to devote as many hours gratis to their church jobs as they do to their professional jobs. It is the one that summons up extraordinary acts of love, compassion and generosity, often in response to the deepest tragedies of life -- and death.

But it is not the one that dismisses out-of-hand half the population of the United States by saying, "My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." As a bishop and stake president, Romney worried about those very people. Indeed, he worried far more about them, and spent far more time and means in assisting them, than the others in his flock who were more fortunate.

The very basis of Mormon community, stretching back to the earliest years of Mormonism nearly two centuries ago, is that the more able have a sacred obligation to assist the less able. That sense of physical community was institutionalized in the Church's Welfare Program, which sprang out of the Great Depression as an exemplary and effective means of combining church and government assistance not only to give to those in need, but also to help them to help themselves. Any who have visited Welfare Square in Salt Lake City, as did the producers of a recent "Rock Center" documentary on MSNBC, cannot help but be impressed with what we have attempted, for over seven decades, to accomplish through what is now an international network of church facilities and volunteers.

Judge Mitt Romney as you will, and vote for or against him as you will; but do not judge Mormonism on the basis of the Mitt Romney that was unveiled to the public this week. He is not the face of Mormonism.

>
>
>
>

[patrick]

On Sep 22, 10:13 pm, Tex <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:38:43 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:56 PM UTC-7, Tex wrote:
>
> > > That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
>
> > > The cult of Thurston Howell III.
>
> > > Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
>
> > > Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.
>
> > > Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
>
> > > Most Mormons need not apply.
>
> > > The cult of plutocrats.
>
> > Most Mormons will vote in lock-step.  They do what they are told to do, whether or not it is in their best interests.  Most Mormons are not wealthy, though they aspire to wealth and are constantly instructed that the way to wealth is the Mormon way and wealth, in and of itself, is de facto evidence that one has adhered devoutly and correctly to Mormon "principles" and been "blessed" by God for this fealty.
>
> > It's no big mystery that pyramid schemes (cults) thrive in the U.S. -- we've been a petri dish for these things since the beginning of European settlement.  "Prosperity" cults have taken over a huge portion of the populace and the Mormon model with the bottom 99% all dutifully tithing without complaint is probably Mitt's model to bring the U.S. into a reflection of Mormon "perfection" for himself and his rich friends.
>
> > Most Mormons believe Mitt is the anointed savior of the U.S. Constitution,  though they will deny it publicly. It's been referred to as the "White Horse Prophecy."  I wonder how they will explain the fact to themselves that the U.S. doesn't want Mormon "salvation."  Or that a fellow republican, (G.W.Bush), did more to undermine the Constitution than any other president in history.
>
> > Here's an interesting article about the reasons why we shouldn't vote for a Mormon or allow a Mormon any authority over the U.S.
>

> >http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/07/exclusive-brigham-yo...

>
> > Ellen
>
> Not all Mormon's
> Here is a former supporter that was at the Democratic convention, with other Mormon's, this year, supporting the President.
>

> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gregory-a-prince-phd/mitt-romney-is-not...

>
> When the news of Mitt Romney's Florida video broke on Monday evening, I was incensed -- but not for its political implications. His arrogant and out-of-hand dismissal of half the population of this country struck me at a visceral level, for it sullied the religion that he and I share -- the religion for which five generations of my ancestry have lived and sacrificed, the religion whose official mantra is "to take care of the poor and needy throughout the world." My first impulse was to rent an airplane towing a banner: "Mitt Romney is Not the Face of Mormonism!"
>
> I was a supporter of Romney 1.0. That was in late 2007, when we had far more in common. We are both Mormons and we both served foreign missions for our church at the same time, he in France and I in Brazil. Some of my best friends had been some of his best friends for decades. Although I am a registered Democrat, his accomplishments as Governor of Massachusetts appealed to me. I contributed the maximum amount to his early presidential primary bid.
>
> I also became an emissary to him, presenting what I felt was an attractive proposition. Helen Whitney, who had recently completed a four-hour PBS documentary, "The Mormons," was also intrigued with Romney, enough that she asked that I propose to him one hour of national coverage on PBS if he would allow her to interview him only about his religion.
>
> "It's a good religion," she said to me, "but he is hiding from it. He needs to own it."
>
> I delivered the proposal in person. He declined, stating that he and his advisors had concluded that the issue of his religion would simply go away. It didn't, but his candidacy did.
>
> Early in 2008, to my dismay, Romney 1.0 became Romney 2.0 by moving far enough to the right to lose my support. He has kept moving ever farther to the right. He has made this move in a successful attempt to gain the nomination, and in an ongoing attempt to persuade no more than 53 percent of the country that he should be the next President.
>
> The issue of Romney's Mormon faith has never gone away, although its presence has waxed and waned as other issues have come and gone. How -- or if -- he chooses to use his religion as part of his public biography is up to him, but the fact that he is the only Mormon ever to be the nominee for the Presidency of a major political party makes it inevitable that even if people do not judge him because of his religion, they will judge his religion because of him. Given the unfolding news of this week, I regret to say that Mitt Romney is not the face of Mormonism.
>
> Romney 1.0 was that face. Having been a missionary myself, I know the formative power of two years of missionary service. Having served as an assistant to one bishop and four stake presidents -- and Romney served as bishop and stake president -- I know the even greater formative power of those offices. I understand completely what his father George meant when he said, "I am completely the product of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." That face of Mormonism is the one that calls on some of its members, particularly bishops and stake presidents, to devote as many hours gratis to their church jobs as they do to their professional jobs. It is the one that summons up extraordinary acts of love, compassion and generosity, often in response to the deepest tragedies of life -- and death.
>
> But it is not the one that dismisses out-of-hand half the population of the United States by saying, "My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." As a bishop and stake president, Romney worried about those very people. Indeed, he worried far more about them, and spent far more time and means in assisting them, than the others in his flock who were more fortunate.
>
> The very basis of Mormon community, stretching back to the earliest years of Mormonism nearly two centuries ago, is that the more able have a sacred obligation to assist the less able. That sense of physical community was institutionalized in the Church's Welfare Program, which sprang out of the Great Depression as an exemplary and effective means of combining church and government assistance not only to give to those in need, but also to help them to help themselves. Any who have visited Welfare Square in Salt Lake City, as did the producers of a recent "Rock Center" documentary on MSNBC, cannot help but be impressed with what we have attempted, for over seven decades, to accomplish through what is now an international network of church facilities and volunteers.
>
> Judge Mitt Romney as you will, and vote for or against him as you will; but do not judge Mormonism on the basis of the Mitt Romney that was unveiled to the public this week. He is not the face of Mormonism.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

he may be a mormon but he sounds remarkably like a right wing
christian. is mormonism following the path of american christianity ?


and what is he the face of ?

[patrick]

my brain is waiting for answers.

then i can

analyze analyze analyze.

:)

[patrick]

humans

[patrick]

chocolate milk.......mmmmmm

[patrick]

On Sep 19, 10:29 pm, Tex <ritter_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the article.
> Lying for the Lord?
> OK, that explains Mitten's pathological aversion for the truth.
> But how do we explain Paul Ryan?
>
> Thomas Aquinas certainly would not approve.
>
> Seems like a Republican disease.
> Sometime they even contradict themselves in mid-sentence, on TV!!!!
>
> Incredible.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:38:43 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:56 PM UTC-7, Tex wrote:
>
> > > That was the "cult" of millionaire donors, Ellen.
>
> > > The cult of Thurston Howell III.
>
> > > Gilligan is part of the 47% he refers to as "victims."
>
> > > Hard working stiffs that don't make enough to pay Federal taxes.
>
> > > Mitt"ens" is in an exclusive cult.
>
> > > Most Mormons need not apply.
>
> > > The cult of plutocrats.
>
> > Most Mormons will vote in lock-step.  They do what they are told to do, whether or not it is in their best interests.  Most Mormons are not wealthy, though they aspire to wealth and are constantly instructed that the way to wealth is the Mormon way and wealth, in and of itself, is de facto evidence that one has adhered devoutly and correctly to Mormon "principles" and been "blessed" by God for this fealty.
>
> > It's no big mystery that pyramid schemes (cults) thrive in the U.S. -- we've been a petri dish for these things since the beginning of European settlement.  "Prosperity" cults have taken over a huge portion of the populace and the Mormon model with the bottom 99% all dutifully tithing without complaint is probably Mitt's model to bring the U.S. into a reflection of Mormon "perfection" for himself and his rich friends.
>
> > Most Mormons believe Mitt is the anointed savior of the U.S. Constitution,  though they will deny it publicly. It's been referred to as the "White Horse Prophecy."  I wonder how they will explain the fact to themselves that the U.S. doesn't want Mormon "salvation."  Or that a fellow republican, (G.W.Bush), did more to undermine the Constitution than any other president in history.
>
> > Here's an interesting article about the reasons why we shouldn't vote for a Mormon or allow a Mormon any authority over the U.S.
>

> >http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/07/exclusive-brigham-yo...

>
> > Ellen
>
> > > On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:08:42 PM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
>
> > > > ...Or some other unholy communion with one of the champions of personal ~responsibility?~  Where did Mitt get his conviction that those of wealth and privilege, those of status and power, those of influence and ~leadership,~ get to lord it over the rest of us "moochers" and "parasites" and "victims?"  At what point, did he of Mormon "social responsibility," turn into a scold who denounces and dismisses anyone who isn't in a position to pay for everything he or she needs, (like a $60,000 appendectomy).  And how does he square this with the right-wing mandate to eviscerate the unions, deprive workers of any sort of (collective) power, or pay them anything all if they can outsource labor to some third-world country with providing some hapless worker the ability to actually take any sort of ~control~ over his own destiny, let alone pay for any of the goods or services Mitt and his crony "job-creators" deign to provide?
>
> > > > Nope, it's the same old cult-like cult nonsense that would like ~victims~ to go away and hide in the bushes, too ashamed to complain, too intimidated to protest, and likely to blame themselves for any unfortunate event they happen to have brought upon themselves.
>
> > > > What a hoot.  It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~
>
> > > > LOLOL...
>
> > > > Ellen

to explain ryans aversion, lets dont forget he IS a right winger.
thats it.

lets talk about human food :)

[patrick]

salad with cucumber dressing

[patrick]

are u hungry yet ?

[Kenny McCormick]

> What a hoot.  It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~
>
> LOLOL...
>
> Ellen

What exactly are you "attempting" to "project upon" others?

[Caligari]

On Nov 1, 8:12 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Why are you assuming psychological states for others?

-- Caligari

[Kenny McCormick]

> Why are you assuming psychological states for others?
>
>   -- Caligari

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/when_in_Rome,_do_as_the_Romans_do

[Caligari]

On Nov 1, 12:42 pm, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Or show real integrity.

[Kenny McCormick]

> Or show real integrity.

Caligari, I cannot find where you took issue with Ellen "assuming
psychological states for others" I scrolled back but found nothing. ??

[Caligari]

On Nov 1, 1:03 pm, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > Or show real integrity.
>
>  Caligari,  I cannot find where you took issue with Ellen  "assuming
> psychological states for others" I scrolled back but found nothing. ??

Your integrity is dependent on others?

[Kenny McCormick]

> Your integrity is dependent on others?

??????????????????????????????????

[Kenny McCormick]

> What a hoot.  It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~
>
> LOLOL...
>
> Ellen

Ellen, why are you assuming psychological states for others?

[elle...@gmail.com]

Why?

Why, I'm a human and that's what humans do.

One makes assumptions, proposes, theorizes, imagines, guesses, forms hypotheses, bets, or formulates hunches about another person's psychological state using the information one has at the time. Some are better at it than others, but it's mostly a game of hide-and-seek. Daniel Goleman wrote a book called "Emotional Intelligence" in which he discussed this.


Assuming or guessing or trying to figure out motives is another thing we do. Mormons have left an easy trail. They state their motives up front and they are happy to ~share~ them. Theirs is a utopian vision with some "prophet" at the lead taking direction from (their version of) G-O-D, who looks surprisingly like an ordinary man and also has a wife (a Mrs. G-O-D). They would like to ~re-create~ this here on earth (as-it-is-in-heaven) and Mitt Romney is their "savior." They believe he has been anointed. (One wonders how they will explain to themselves why, if he doesn't win the election, they've failed to bring about G-O-D's will. No doubt they will go to their quorum and discuss one-on-one with G-O-D and come up with some reason -- though "reason" will have little to do with it.)


Ellen

[Kenny McCormick]

> Why?
>
> Why, I'm a human and that's what humans do.
>
> One makes assumptions, proposes, theorizes, imagines, guesses, forms hypotheses, bets, or formulates hunches about another person's psychological state using the information one has at the time.  Some are better at it than others, but it's mostly a game of hide-and-seek.  Daniel Goleman wrote a book called "Emotional Intelligence" in which he discussed this.
>
> Assuming or guessing or trying to figure out motives is another thing we do.  Mormons have left an easy trail.  They state their motives up front and they are happy to ~share~ them.  Theirs is a utopian vision with some "prophet" at the lead taking direction from (their version of) G-O-D, who looks surprisingly like an ordinary man and also has a wife (a Mrs. G-O-D).  They would like to ~re-create~ this here on earth (as-it-is-in-heaven) and Mitt Romney is their "savior."  They believe he has been anointed.  (One wonders how they will explain to themselves why, if he doesn't win the election, they've failed to bring about G-O-D's will.  No doubt they will go to their quorum and discuss one-on-one with G-O-D and come up with some reason -- though "reason" will have little to do with it.)
>
> Ellen

It is refreshing of you to present your "assumptions, proposes,

theorizes, imagines, guesses, forms hypotheses, bets, or formulates

hunches" AS NOTHING MORE THAN YOUR PERSONAL "assumptions, proposes,

theorizes, imagines, guesses, forms hypotheses, bets, or formulates

hunches", for a change. Thank-you.

[elle...@gmail.com]

So, you've drunk the Landmark Kult-Kool-Aid and now imagine yourself to be in supreme possession of some great equalizer with which you can reduce anyone's observation to just someone's ~personal~ opinion and thus easily disposed of or dismissed, discounted and ignored.

Imagine, if you will, a method or trick of paralyzing another person's ability to think critically. Think what power you might exercise over that person if you could inject your own version of the truth and the way things ought to be (and what he should be doing or not doing). (And no fair claiming you are giving him the "opportunity" to change his mind, imagine "other" options, or ~choose~ another "position.") Imagine if you have designed a program to do this on a large(ish) scale. What would it look like?


Are you (even dimly) aware of the fact that everything you, I, or anybody else states is a reflection of what they believe to be true at the time (if they're not acting or lying) and that all you have to determine whether or not someone's statement bears any validity whatsoever are you critical thinking skills? You have allowed Landmark (or some similar entity) to tamper with your(however feeble)ability. They are well-practiced in undermining the very bedrock of your thinking, sensing, assessing, evaluating, and judging faculties by persuading you to set aside this "personal" chatter and accepting (uncritically) what they say. You've colluded with their destruction of your very own "personal" obligation and substituted a mass/group/pre-digested/collective/Werner Erhard-concocted pile of poop. Think about how often you use on of his ~tools~ on your friends, family, or acquaintances. Think you're really getting anywhere doing this?


Ellen

[patrick]

On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:08:42 PM UTC-5, elle...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...Or some other unholy communion with one of the champions of personal ~responsibility?~ Where did Mitt get his conviction that those of wealth and privilege, those of status and power, those of influence and ~leadership,~ get to lord it over the rest of us "moochers" and "parasites" and "victims?" At what point, did he of Mormon "social responsibility," turn into a scold who denounces and dismisses anyone who isn't in a position to pay for everything he or she needs, (like a $60,000 appendectomy). And how does he square this with the right-wing mandate to eviscerate the unions, deprive workers of any sort of (collective) power, or pay them anything all if they can outsource labor to some third-world country with providing some hapless worker the ability to actually take any sort of ~control~ over his own destiny, let alone pay for any of the goods or services Mitt and his crony "job-creators" deign to provide?
>
>
>
> Nope, it's the same old cult-like cult nonsense that would like ~victims~ to go away and hide in the bushes, too ashamed to complain, too intimidated to protest, and likely to blame themselves for any unfortunate event they happen to have brought upon themselves.
>
>
>

> What a hoot. It's just so many idiotic cult-mindset nutters projecting themselves upon society in some lame-assed attempt to ~create their own reality.~
>
>
>
> LOLOL...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ellen

kenny..............Moooooooooooossssse

[Kenny McCormick]

> So, you've drunk the Landmark Kult-Kool-Aid and now imagine yourself to be in supreme possession of some great equalizer with which you can reduce anyone's observation to just someone's ~personal~ opinion and thus easily disposed of or dismissed, discounted and ignored.
>
> Imagine, if you will, a method or trick of paralyzing another person's ability to think critically.  Think what power you might exercise over that person if you could inject your own version of the truth and the way things ought to be (and what he should be doing or not doing).  (And no fair claiming you are giving him the "opportunity" to change his mind, imagine "other" options, or ~choose~ another "position.") Imagine if you have designed a program to do this on a large(ish) scale.  What would it look like?
>
> Are you (even dimly) aware of the fact that everything you, I, or anybody else states is a reflection of what they believe to be true at the time (if they're not acting or lying) and that all you have to determine whether or not someone's statement bears any validity whatsoever are you critical thinking skills?  You have allowed Landmark (or some similar entity) to tamper with your(however feeble)ability.  They are well-practiced in undermining the very bedrock of your thinking, sensing, assessing, evaluating, and judging faculties by persuading you to set aside this "personal" chatter and accepting (uncritically) what they say.  You've colluded with their destruction of your very own "personal" obligation and substituted a mass/group/pre-digested/collective/Werner Erhard-concocted pile of poop.  Think about how often you use on of his ~tools~ on your friends, family, or acquaintances.  Think you're really getting anywhere doing this?
>
> Ellen

Kinda like how you "dispose of, dismiss, discount and ignore" other's
comments by labelling others "Kult-Kool-Aid" "drinkers" and "pile of
poop" "substituters"? You mean like how you are doing your own version
of what you are saying others are doing? You mean like that?

[Kenny McCormick]

>  Think about how often you use on of his ~tools~ on your friends, family, or acquaintances.
>

> Ellen

Do you have any "tools" that use "on" "friends, family, or
acquaintances." or "on" people on the internet Ellen? You seem
like a person with a full tools box. What are your "tools" and where
did you get your set?

[elle...@gmail.com]

Do try to come up with some other way to respond to something you don't like rather than just turning it back on the person who said it originally. This isn't clever or even mildly intelligent. Maybe it does on your other Landmark friends or the naive or unaware but that doesn't work very well here. "Tex" has already done it to death.

Do you not know that Landmark is designed to high-jack your ego defenses and use them to defend Landmark? Yours are juvenile; I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I PeeWee Herman-like.


Ellen

[Kenny McCormick]

> Do try to come up with some other way to respond to something you don't like rather than just turning it back on the person who said it originally.  This isn't clever or even mildly intelligent.  Maybe it does on your other Landmark friends or the naive or unaware but that doesn't work very well here.  "Tex" has already done it to death.
>
> Do you not know that Landmark is designed to high-jack your ego defenses and use them to defend Landmark?  Yours are juvenile; I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I PeeWee Herman-like.
>
> Ellen

Have you any other super-clever ultra-intelligent mature non-PeeWee
Herman-like opinions about what others should "try" and what things
were "designed to do" that you wish to share?

[Serena Nordstrup]

Hi Kenny

On Nov 5, 10:06 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

You omitted to answer the question: Do you not know that Landmark is

designed to high-jack your ego defenses and use them to defend
Landmark?

So: Do you not know that Landmark Education is designed to high-jack
your ego-defenses and to use them to defend Landmark Education?

[Kenny McCormick]

> You omitted to answer the question: Do you not know that Landmark is
> designed to high-jack your ego defenses and use them to defend
> Landmark?
>
> So: Do you not know that Landmark Education is designed to high-jack
> your ego-defenses and to use them to defend Landmark Education?

??????????????????

[Serena Nordstrup]

On Nov 6, 2:37 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

... one could take that as a "no" ...

[Kenny McCormick]

> > ??????????????????

> ... one could take that as a "no" ...

"one" (Serena) could take that" in whatever convenient way best
promote's one's (Serena's) point of view.

[Serena Nordstrup]

On Nov 7, 6:01 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

As Francis Bacon used to say, "writing maketh an exact man"...

[Kenny McCormick]

> As Francis Bacon used to say, "writing maketh an exact man"...

What does that have to do with Landmark Education?

[Serena Nordstrup]

On 19 Nov, 04:02, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > As Francis Bacon used to say, "writing maketh an exact man"...
>
> What does that  have to do with Landmark Education?

Respect for ~Word~, perhaps ...

[Kenny McCormick]

> Respect for ~Word~, perhaps ...

Your hangup for using tildes + lingo, loosely based on your warped
perception on some course or group, which you find yourself hung up on
for 15 years now (LOL) , is noted.

[Serena Nordstrup]

On Nov 22, 8:22 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > Respect for ~Word~, perhaps ...
>
> Your hangup for using tildes + lingo,

You know of a better way of succinctly and repetitiously suggesting
the hollowness and depravity of rosenbergist jargon?

> loosely based on your warped
> perception on some course or group, which you find yourself hung up on
> for 15 years now (LOL) , is noted.

I hope you find that noting useful.

[Kenny McCormick]

> You know of a better way of succinctly and repetitiously suggesting
> the hollowness and depravity of rosenbergist jargon?

You are making progress Serena, just dig a little deeper. When did
you first see/experience this "hollowness and depravity" you speak
of?

[Serena Nordstrup]

On Nov 23, 2:32 am, Kenny McCormick <kennymccormicksfa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On encountering the so-called ~hunger~ ~so-called ~project~ and the
org calld "Werner Erhard and Associates".

But you omitted to answer my question: You know of a better way of

succinctly and repetitiously suggesting the hollowness and depravity

of rosenbergist jargon than highlighting its sacred language ?

[Kenny McCormick]

> On encountering the so-called ~hunger~ ~so-called ~project~ and the org calld "Werner Erhard and Associates".

Good, good Serena, just little deeper still. When was the first time
little Serena saw/experienced "hollowness and depravity"? You are
doing great, keep looking. This fan site is a safe environment for you
to be honest. Don't be put off by the L Ron Hubbard fanatics and
religious zealots shilling for jesus.

[Kenny McCormick]

> But you omitted to answer my question: You know of a better way of succinctly and repetitiously suggesting  the hollowness and depravity of rosenbergist jargon than highlighting its sacred language ?

?????????????????