"Intellectual"
David O'Lantern
What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
D.
--
"Reaching after something, touching nothing, is all I ever do."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
Robert J. Kolker
David O'Lantern wrote:
>
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
If you have to ask, you are not one.
Bob Kolker
mazzolata
>
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
>
>
> D.
>
Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ma chambre a la forme d'une cage
le soleil passe son bras par la fenetre
Robert J. Kolker
mazzolata wrote:
> Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
> the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
Primo! Bravo!
Bob Kolker
>
Francis A. Miniter
Tell Overture and not think of the Lone Ranger.
Francis A. Miniter
David O'Lantern
["intellectual"]
> The definition I grew up with was one who could listen to the William
> Tell Overture and not think of the Lone Ranger.
"Okay Davey, now don't think of the Lone Ranger while you listen to this,
not even once!" Wouldn't work, even if I'd known who the Lone Ranger was.
As a kid I knew more about Lenny Bruce's jokes than the actual Masked Man;
wasn't my generation. But the Rockford Files, well, he looked like my dad.
And the crazy lady up the street said "You're a Maverick too. I can tell!"
When I hear the first part of _The Barber of Seville_ I think of Bugs too.
The
Steppenpup
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
>
>
> D.
Smartass with a Ph.D.
Paul A Sand
>
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
Hayek called intellectuals "professional secondhand dealers in ideas."
--
-- Paul A. Sand | I can't decide if I'm bragging or
-- University of New Hampshire | complaining.
-- p...@unh.edu | (Mary Loveless, rec.arts.books)
-- http://pubpages.unh.edu/~pas |
Hartmut Schmider
DoL> But the Rockford Files, well, he looked like my dad.
You know, I'm thinking the exact same thing everytime the guy's on
cable. Is there some kind of Universal Daddyness (tm) built into him? Got
to ask Mel Gibson next time I see him.
Regards, Hartmut "he ain't heavy" Schmider
--
Hartmut Schmider, Queen's University h...@post.queensu.ca
Man lebt nicht einmal einmal. Karl Kraus
jonah thomas
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
Intellectuals are people who believe their thinking is somehow different
and superior to the common run of mediocre humans.
You are an intellectual.
There are a lot of people who believe that their thinking is somehow
different and superior to the common run of intellectuals.
They are intellectuals too.
David J. Loftus
> David O'Lantern <thed...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message news:<2003072416...@shell.rawbw.com>...
> > What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
Those sometimes qualify, but I don't believe an
intellectual need be a smartass or possess a
doctorate. My wife is more highly educated than
I, but I think we would both agree that I'm much
more of an intellectual than she is.
I think an intellectual is a person who tends
to approach questions of social policy, literature,
and even personal problems through logic and analysis.
It helps to be broadly read, but I'm not sure even
that is essential.
I regard the term as neutral -- neither positive
nor pejorative, necessarily. It merely describes
one approach to life, and not necessarily an
inherently good or productive one.
David Loftus
Nutmegger
"jonah thomas" wrote:::
> David O'Lantern wrote:
>
> > What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
> Intellectuals are people who believe their thinking is somehow different
> and superior to the common run of mediocre humans.
Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told me I
was.
>
> You are an intellectual.
>
> There are a lot of people who believe that their thinking is somehow
> different and superior to the common run of intellectuals.
I don't think my thinking is superior, nor all that different.
But, I've often been told I think too much.
<What a terrible thing to say>
> They are intellectuals too.
Snotty ones.
Francis A. Miniter
A thoughtful response, and the only one of us (myself included) so far
to seriously respond. I especially like the statement that
"intellectual" is a neutral term, implying neither good nor bad. I do
think it curious that in America, to label a person as intellectual is
usually pejorative, implying that the person is out of touch with
reality, whereas in the former Warsaw Pact countries, it was a positive
term, often used to describe those whom the populous hoped would lead
them out of the dead end of communist ideology.
Why does America seem to have this negative concept of intellectuals?
Indeed, a lot of the replies here to the original post reflect that
negative aspect of the term. Whence comes the negativism? Was it Agnew
["the nattering nabobs of negativism" and "the effete eastern
intellectual elite"] who conjoined the concepts? Is it a political
backlash to the liberalism of the 60s? But then, are there no
conservative intellectuals, at least as so labeled by conservatives?
Francis A. Miniter
bob
Bob, that was a silly response. BTW, do you believe that you are an
innerlechewal? Also, why do you sign posts with "Bob" but have
"Robert" in your name field? Does the "J" stand for Jehosephat?
Just wondering.
bob
wrote:
>David O'Lantern wrote:
>>
>> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
>the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
Weren't they?
bob
Damn, you gag me.
bob
>"jonah thomas" wrote:::
>
>> David O'Lantern wrote:
>>
>> > What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>>
>> Intellectuals are people who believe their thinking is somehow different
>> and superior to the common run of mediocre humans.
>
>Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told me I
>was.
A mediocre human?
[sorry, I couldn't resist]
>> You are an intellectual.
>>
>> There are a lot of people who believe that their thinking is somehow
>> different and superior to the common run of intellectuals.
>
>I don't think my thinking is superior, nor all that different.
>But, I've often been told I think too much.
I know I process information a lot faster than most people. My memory
is highly associative (this can be a pain in the ass when I'm trying
to remember someone's name - my wife, for example - but it's great at
other time - just can't think of one now). So, in a sense, my thinking
is different and (some would say) superior to the unwashed masses (I'm
still in my bathrobe - I should take a shower sometime today) but I
don't consider myself an intellectual.
This is where someone can respond "neither do we".
bob
- I got there first
Steppenpup
>
>
>
> D.
I wonder... can one be considered an intellectual if he's well-read
and familiar with intellectual ideas but haven't contributed anything
original on his own? Is knowlege enough or one must be original,
clever?
Suppose someone read all of Marx and Lenin and Chomsky and go blah
blah blah about how capitalism and US sucks, but hasn't furthered
these idiot theories. Is he a leftist intellectual?
Steppenpup
>
Can one be intellectual about anything? Can one be intellectual about
baking cookies or the proper way to use toilet paper?
Or, does subject and topic matter for intellectual debate?
If someone tackles heavy subjects--literature, art, foreign policy
debates--with plain language(say, Bronx accent), could he be a
populist intellectual?
Steve Hayes
>Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
>the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
As opposed to?
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: haye...@yahoo.com
Web: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm
Nutmegger
"bob" wrote
> >Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told me I
> >was.
>
> A mediocre human?
>
> [sorry, I couldn't resist]
Heh, heh...somedays I wish I was mediocre - but usually not.
Can I be mediocre today?
<I'd have to change what I'm wearing>
>
> >> You are an intellectual.
> >>
> >> There are a lot of people who believe that their thinking is somehow
> >> different and superior to the common run of intellectuals.
> >
> >I don't think my thinking is superior, nor all that different.
> >But, I've often been told I think too much.
>
> I know I process information a lot faster than most people.
Can you speed read?
>My memory
> is highly associative
Mine too.
>(this can be a pain in the ass when I'm trying
> to remember someone's name - my wife, for example -
You can be a pain in the ass too.
>but it's great at
> other time - just can't think of one now).
When you need to learn something, you'd probably get it down before others?
>So, in a sense, my thinking
> is different and (some would say) superior to the unwashed masses
I am washed, powdered and ready to go.
>(I'm still in my bathrobe -
Umm Bob, do you have anything on under that robe?
>I should take a shower sometime today) but I
> don't consider myself an intellectual.
You are if I ever met one.
> This is where someone can respond "neither do we".
> bob
> - I got there first
As usual.
Sam Culotta
> Why does America seem to have this negative concept of intellectuals? <
I think it has a lot to do with the way American culture embraces
egalitarianism and the way we hold the "common man", whatever the hell that
is, in such high regard. The term Intellectual gives off a strong whiff of
elitism.
>Was it Agnew
> ["the nattering nabobs of negativism" and "the effete eastern
> intellectual elite"] who conjoined the concepts?<
I don't know if I'd point to Agnew as the source, but for sure many
Conservatives associate intellectuals with left wing academic types.
>But then, are there no
> conservative intellectuals, at least as so labeled by conservatives?<
Sure there are, but even they are often subjected to criticism or treated
with suspicion by the more homely types.
Speaking of which: Karl Rove is considered the White House Intellectual and
Bush's pet name for him is "turdblossom".. probably to make clear that
although Rove is the most important person in Bush's brain trust, he must
be reminded of the fact that he don't have manure on his boots.
--
Sam
Sam Culotta
Sam Culotta
through just fine.
--
Sam
"Sam Culotta" <culot...@gte.net> wrote in message news:...
bob
>David O'Lantern <thed...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message news:<2003072416...@shell.rawbw.com>...
>> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>Can one be intellectual about anything? Can one be intellectual about
>baking cookies or the proper way to use toilet paper?
You are really caught up with this one, aren't ya dude. First you
wrote something that wasn't particularly funny or accurate (smartass
with a PhD) and now you've posted two more responses that contained
more words but ... well, you know.
Do you feel threatened by intellectuals? Have you been snubbed by one
or more? Did you fail the Densa entry exam? Did it wound you deeply
when you finally realized that you'd never gain entrance into the
American Academy of Arts and Sciences? Do you have erectile
disfunction? Do you fantasize about being a proctologist? Visiting
one? How many times have you read Sues on the Loose?
[Entertainment]
from: http://users.vei.net/shadow/suess/St-tng_s.htm
Picard: Sigma Indri, that's the star,
So, Data, please, how far? How far?
Data: Our ship can get there very fast
But still the trip will last and last
We'll have two days til we arrive
But can the Indrans there survive?
Picard: LaForge, please give us factor nine.
LaForge: But, sir, the engines are offline!
Picard: Offline! But why? I want to go!
Please make it so, please make it so!
Riker: But sir, if Geordi says we can't,
We can't, we mustn't, and we shan't,
The danger here is far too great!
Picard: But surely we must not be late!
Troi: I'm sensing anger and great ire.
Computer: Alert! Alert! The ship's on fire!
Picard: The ship's on fire? How could this be?
Who lit the fire?
Riker: Not me.
[/Entertainment]
>Or, does subject and topic matter for intellectual debate?
Jonah?
>If someone tackles heavy subjects--literature, art, foreign policy
>debates--with plain language(say, Bronx accent), could he be a
>populist intellectual?
Umm, I use plain language all the time. At one point I used to pose
and try to be very eruditic. OK, so I never did that. I never even
thought about it. I did get involved in a lot of silly discussions
though. Well, not all that many.
I am extremely well read. The classics are stacked all over the house.
Asimov, Clancy, Hoag, King, Koontz, ....
Shit man, I'm pretty much an expert when it comes to great literature.
Would you like to be my friend?
bob
<nutmegg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"bob" wrote
>
>> >Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told me I
>> >was.
>>
>> A mediocre human?
>>
>> [sorry, I couldn't resist]
>
>Heh, heh...somedays I wish I was mediocre - but usually not.
Why would you want to be mediocre? I mean, I'm mediocre. It's not all
that exciting.
>Can I be mediocre today?
It's up to you.
><I'd have to change what I'm wearing>
Why?
>> >> You are an intellectual.
>> >>
>> >> There are a lot of people who believe that their thinking is somehow
>> >> different and superior to the common run of intellectuals.
>> >
>> >I don't think my thinking is superior, nor all that different.
>> >But, I've often been told I think too much.
>>
>> I know I process information a lot faster than most people.
>
>Can you speed read?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. I never took a course or practiced
techniques of any sort, if that's what you mean. When I was in high
school we were tested for reading speed at one point. Back then I
could read 1500 words per minute (and I answered all the questions
correctly - perhaps I was cheating - yes, that's it - I got the
answers from another kid who had taken the test earlier - I wanted to
impress my teacher because she was hot hot hot). If I could really
read that fast I wouldn't use the ability much. It'd tire me out.
Shit, even thinking tires me out. I do my best to avoid it.
>>My memory
>> is highly associative
>
>Mine too.
I was fibbing. We really *don't* have anything in common.
>>(this can be a pain in the ass when I'm trying
>> to remember someone's name - my wife, for example -
>
>You can be a pain in the ass too.
Really? You are hurting my feelings, ya know? Why is everyone so mean
to me?
>>but it's great at
>> other time - just can't think of one now).
>
>When you need to learn something, you'd probably get it down before others?
Get it down?
"Do a little dance, make a little love"
"Oh what a night"
And now I'm thinking about Sinatra. You nasty nasty woman. You've got
me thinking about dead people, and the living dead (Ronald Reagan, for
example).
And Jerry.
>>So, in a sense, my thinking
>> is different and (some would say) superior to the unwashed masses
>
>I am washed, powdered and ready to go.
Powdered?
>>(I'm still in my bathrobe -
>
>Umm Bob, do you have anything on under that robe?
That's not a very polite question.
>>I should take a shower sometime today) but I
>> don't consider myself an intellectual.
>
>You are if I ever met one.
Baloney. You need to get out more.
>> This is where someone can respond "neither do we".
>> bob
>> - I got there first
>
>As usual.
Yadda yadda.
bob
"I see you've got your list out, say your piece and kiss off.
Guess I get the jist of it, but it's alright
Oh well anyway, sorry that you feel that way.
Every silver linings got a touch of grey
I will get by, I will get by, I will get by, I will survive"
David J. Loftus
> Hi David,
>
> A thoughtful response, and the only one of us (myself included) so far
> to seriously respond.
There exists a widespread and utter terror -- on Usenet
as much as anywhere else -- of appearing uncool,
even (or possibly even especially) in front of a
crowd of near-total strangers.
> I especially like the statement that
> "intellectual" is a neutral term, implying neither good nor bad. I do
> think it curious that in America, to label a person as intellectual is
> usually pejorative, implying that the person is out of touch with
> reality, whereas in the former Warsaw Pact countries, it was a positive
> term, often used to describe those whom the populous hoped would lead
> them out of the dead end of communist ideology.
>
> Why does America seem to have this negative concept of intellectuals?
> Indeed, a lot of the replies here to the original post reflect that
> negative aspect of the term. Whence comes the negativism? Was it Agnew
> ["the nattering nabobs of negativism" and "the effete eastern
> intellectual elite"] who conjoined the concepts? Is it a political
> backlash to the liberalism of the 60s?
I'm not old enough, or educated enough, to know for
certain, but I have a feeling that anti-intellectualism
in the U.S. goes back much further -- well before the
error of intellectual liberals of defending Stalinism
in the 1930s; surely Herr Mencken would say so.
> But then, are there no conservative intellectuals,
> at least as so labeled by conservatives?
Perhaps Messers Will and Buckley would deem themselves
such. Which would make me less comfortable about labeling
myself one than I was when I first posted to this thread!
David Loftus
Nutmegger
"bob" wrote:::
> >> >Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told
me I
> >> >was.
> >>
> >> A mediocre human?
> >>
> >> [sorry, I couldn't resist]
> >
> >Heh, heh...somedays I wish I was mediocre - but usually not.
>
> Why would you want to be mediocre?
To blend in, to be able to live a mediocre life as opposed to an angstful
passionate one.
>I mean, I'm mediocre. It's not all
> that exciting.
I'd done with exciting, sort of.
> >Can I be mediocre today?
> It's up to you.
It's not a good day for such, maybe tomorrow.
Yes, definitely tomorrow when I go to the pawn shop.
> ><I'd have to change what I'm wearing>
> Why?
I'm dressed a tad bit sexy for mediocre. But, of course - I'm going out.
Maybe I'll be home early, maybe not.
> >Can you speed read?
> I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Read fast.
>I never took a course or practiced
> techniques of any sort, if that's what you mean.
Not really, I assumed since you process info fast you would read fast BUT I
hate to assume anything!!!
>When I was in high
> school we were tested for reading speed at one point. Back then I
> could read 1500 words per minute (and I answered all the questions
> correctly - perhaps I was cheating - yes, that's it - I got the
> answers from another kid who had taken the test earlier - I wanted to
> impress my teacher because she was hot hot hot).
That's is pretty fast.
>If I could really
> read that fast I wouldn't use the ability much. It'd tire me out.
> Shit, even thinking tires me out. I do my best to avoid it.
Lol, I hope you don't do everything fast. Sometimes slow is better.
>
> >>My memory
> >> is highly associative
> >
> >Mine too.
>
> I was fibbing. We really *don't* have anything in common.
Nah.
>
> >>(this can be a pain in the ass when I'm trying
> >> to remember someone's name - my wife, for example -
> >You can be a pain in the ass too.
> Really?
Yes.
>You are hurting my feelings, ya know?
I doubt it very much.
>Why is everyone so mean to me?
You thrive on it?
> >When you need to learn something, you'd probably get it down before
others?
> Get it down?
Sure.
> "Do a little dance, make a little love"
> "Oh what a night"
"Get down tonight"
I remember that song.
>
> And now I'm thinking about Sinatra. You nasty nasty woman.
I annoy you - remember?
>You've got
> me thinking about dead people,
At least I don't have you seeing dead people.
>and the living dead (Ronald Reagan, for
> example).
I have no opinion of him.
Dear Mr. President,
I hope the disease does not make you suffer too much, only what is fair for
the suffering you caused with your Arms Deals.
Yours Truely,
Nutmegger
> And Jerry.
He did not impress me all that much.
>
> >>So, in a sense, my thinking
> >> is different and (some would say) superior to the unwashed masses
> >
> >I am washed, powdered and ready to go.
> Powdered?
Umm....yeah. In the summer I put power in my bra and other places to absorb
the sweat.
I don't have a/c and I sweat when it is 92 degrees out.
> >>(I'm still in my bathrobe -
> >Umm Bob, do you have anything on under that robe?
> That's not a very polite question.
I'm not polite right now, but I'll always be a spice.
>
> >>I should take a shower sometime today) but I
> >> don't consider myself an intellectual.
> >You are if I ever met one.
> Baloney.
You are!
>You need to get out more.
I am, but it is not working........
Now what?
> >> This is where someone can respond "neither do we".
> >> bob
> >> - I got there first
> >As usual.
> Yadda yadda.
Bite me - I'm a cookie.
<Told you I wasn't polite>
>
> bob
>
> "I see you've got your list out, say your piece and kiss off.
> Guess I get the jist of it, but it's alright
> Oh well anyway, sorry that you feel that way.
> Every silver linings got a touch of grey
> I will get by, I will get by, I will get by, I will survive"
Ugh! I hate that song....
"Jeremiah was a bullfrog
was a good friend of mine
never understand a single word he said
and I helped his drink his wine"
Robert J. Kolker
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 21:15:14 -0400, mazzolata <mazz...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
>>the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
>
>
> As opposed to?
Jesse and Frank, two outlaws.
Bob Kolker
>
>
bob
>> >> >Lol...I never considered myself one until a high school teacher told
>me I
>> >> >was.
>> >>
>> >> A mediocre human?
>> >>
>> >> [sorry, I couldn't resist]
>> >
>> >Heh, heh...somedays I wish I was mediocre - but usually not.
>>
>> Why would you want to be mediocre?
>
>To blend in, to be able to live a mediocre life as opposed to an angstful
>passionate one.
I see. I knew you wanted to be like me.
>>I mean, I'm mediocre. It's not all
>> that exciting.
>
>I'd done with exciting, sort of.
What do you mean, sort of?
>> >Can I be mediocre today?
>> It's up to you.
>
>It's not a good day for such, maybe tomorrow.
>Yes, definitely tomorrow when I go to the pawn shop.
Buying or selling?
>> ><I'd have to change what I'm wearing>
>> Why?
>
>I'm dressed a tad bit sexy for mediocre. But, of course - I'm going out.
Ah, you want to get ... action. You could save money and time by going
into a local chatroom.
>Maybe I'll be home early, maybe not.
Maybe you'll get attacked by a grizzly bear. It happens sometimes.
Must suck bit time.
>> >Can you speed read?
>> I'm not sure what you mean by that.
>
>Read fast.
Ok. No, I can't read fast.
>>I never took a course or practiced
>> techniques of any sort, if that's what you mean.
>
>Not really, I assumed since you process info fast you would read fast BUT I
>hate to assume anything!!!
I was fibbing about that. I'm a really slow thinker. Just like Bruce.
>>When I was in high
>> school we were tested for reading speed at one point. Back then I
>> could read 1500 words per minute (and I answered all the questions
>> correctly - perhaps I was cheating - yes, that's it - I got the
>> answers from another kid who had taken the test earlier - I wanted to
>> impress my teacher because she was hot hot hot).
>That's is pretty fast.
It sure is. It'd would be nice to actually be able to read that fast.
I have to read out loud to understand things. Most of the time my wife
reads usenet for me and I dictate my responses to her. I like the way
she speaks slowly and loud enough that I don't have to worry about my
thoughts drifting when she reads for me.
>>If I could really
>> read that fast I wouldn't use the ability much. It'd tire me out.
>> Shit, even thinking tires me out. I do my best to avoid it.
>
>Lol, I hope you don't do everything fast. Sometimes slow is better.
Are you being vulgar?
>> >>My memory
>> >> is highly associative
>> >
>> >Mine too.
>>
>> I was fibbing. We really *don't* have anything in common.
>
>Nah.
I'm glad you are finally able to admit it to yourself.
>> >>(this can be a pain in the ass when I'm trying
>> >> to remember someone's name - my wife, for example -
>> >You can be a pain in the ass too.
>> Really?
>Yes.
Today my wife went to the airport to pick up my daughter. I called her
every 15 minutes on her way back and asked her where she was. As she
got closer I called more frequently. When she got here I called her
from the end of the driveway.
Would that annoy you?
>>You are hurting my feelings, ya know?
>I doubt it very much.
Your being insensitive. I don't think you are a very nice person.
>>Why is everyone so mean to me?
>You thrive on it?
Not at all. Has anyone ever told you, and if not then consider this
the first time, that you have a very screwed up way of looking at the
world?
>> >When you need to learn something, you'd probably get it down before
>others?
>> Get it down?
>Sure.
What does that mean?
>> "Do a little dance, make a little love"
>> "Oh what a night"
>
>"Get down tonight"
>I remember that song.
Actually, I referred to two different songs.
Is that what you meant though?
>> And now I'm thinking about Sinatra. You nasty nasty woman.
>I annoy you - remember?
How could I forget?
>>You've got
>> me thinking about dead people,
>At least I don't have you seeing dead people.
I've seen dead people. What's wrong with that?
>>and the living dead (Ronald Reagan, for
>> example).
>
>I have no opinion of him.
That why did you write what you did below?
>
>Dear Mr. President,
>I hope the disease does not make you suffer too much, only what is fair for
>the suffering you caused with your Arms Deals.
>
>Yours Truely,
>Nutmegger
What arms deal was that?
>> And Jerry.
>He did not impress me all that much.
Sacrilege.
>> >>So, in a sense, my thinking
>> >> is different and (some would say) superior to the unwashed masses
>> >
>> >I am washed, powdered and ready to go.
>> Powdered?
>
>Umm....yeah. In the summer I put power in my bra and other places to absorb
>the sweat.
Electric?
BTW, you are being vulgar again.
>I don't have a/c and I sweat when it is 92 degrees out.
You should get AC. I don't like it when it gets over 78F inside. My
wife doesn't like it when it is lower than 78F inside. I can relate to
Jack Spratt.
>> >>(I'm still in my bathrobe -
>> >Umm Bob, do you have anything on under that robe?
>> That's not a very polite question.
>I'm not polite right now, but I'll always be a spice.
I'm not into discussing that sort of thing with someone I'm not
sleeping with or planning to sleep with at some point in the future.
I certainly wouldn't discuss a topic like that in a public forum
unless I was posting to alt.sex.stories or some other vile corner of
usenet or the web. Since I don't frequent that sort of place (I like
pictures) it's unlikely I'll ever write about what exactly my bathrobe
is covering.
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>> >>I should take a shower sometime today) but I
>> >> don't consider myself an intellectual.
>> >You are if I ever met one.
>> Baloney.
>You are!
I am not. You are just saying this to be annoying.
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>>You need to get out more.
>I am, but it is not working........
>Now what?
Go to different places. I'm not sure where intellectuals hang out but
I imagine one of the others involved in this thread could steer you in
the right direction. You might even get lucky.
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>> >> This is where someone can respond "neither do we".
>> >> bob
>> >> - I got there first
>> >As usual.
>> Yadda yadda.
>Bite me - I'm a cookie.
You are recycling insults.
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
[Do you get it yet?]
><Told you I wasn't polite>
>>
>> bob
>>
>> "I see you've got your list out, say your piece and kiss off.
>> Guess I get the jist of it, but it's alright
>> Oh well anyway, sorry that you feel that way.
>> Every silver linings got a touch of grey
>> I will get by, I will get by, I will get by, I will survive"
>
>Ugh! I hate that song....
I feel really bad about that.
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>"Jeremiah was a bullfrog
>was a good friend of mine
>never understand a single word he said
>and I helped his drink his wine"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/v22n2_frogs.asp
Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
vulgar conversation from this point forward.
David O'Lantern
[...]
> There exists a widespread and utter terror -- on Usenet
> as much as anywhere else -- of appearing uncool,
> even (or possibly even especially) in front of a
> crowd of near-total strangers.
There is? Either I've successfully defied that, or maybe
I never quite learned it (the "raised by wolves" theory
of my development), or maybe I've proven that -- at least
on Usenet -- posting about one's sexual inadequacies and
explosive diarrhea, for example, is really truly "kewl".
(That last might be why I've been called "charismatic",
regarding my Usenet posts anyway.)
Lewis Mammel
Steppenpup wrote:
> Can one be intellectual about anything? Can one be intellectual about
> baking cookies or the proper way to use toilet paper?
I'm not so sure about cookies.
Blue
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
>
>
"an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism. B.
Francis A. Miniter
I think David Loftus said it best in this thread when he stated that it
is the way one approaches questions - with logic and analysis - that
makes the difference. The intellectual recognizes the emotive element
in discourse and distrusts it if not accompanied by reason and evidence.
For instance, there was recently an on-line article alleging that the
ACLU is trying to destroy all public displays of religion including
those on private property. No cases were cited, no quotations from ACLU
representatives. Just emotional rhetoric. There are no cases and a
glance at the ACLU web site shows that they have only opposed state
supported religious displays on public property. The article was not
an intellectual approach to the problem. The author did no homework,
chose to believe what he wanted, regardless of evidence and published a
non-factual declamation.
Francis A. Miniter
bob
A cookie recipe can, in some cases, be considered intellectual
property. For example:
United States Patent 6,093,437
Katta , et al. July 25, 2000
Toaster cookies
The next three will really get you salivating.
United States Patent 4,752,484
Pflaumer , et al. June 21, 1988
Dual-textured cookie products containing a unique saccharide mixture
United States Patent 4,344,969
Youngquist , et al. August 17, 1982
Single-dough cookies having storage stable texture
United States Patent 4,664,921
Seiden May 12, 1987
Dual-textured cookie products containing narrow melting range
shortenings
Steve Hayes
Is "intellectual" the singular of "intelligentsia"?
David O'Lantern
Okay, maybe I'll have to do it this way: let's take a vote!
Am I an intellectual? YES or NO?
The
Lewis Mammel
"Francis A. Miniter" wrote:
> I think David Loftus said it best in this thread when he stated that it
> is the way one approaches questions - with logic and analysis - that
> makes the difference. The intellectual recognizes the emotive element
> in discourse and distrusts it if not accompanied by reason and evidence.
"If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be;
but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic." - Tweedledee
"Reason, like whiskey, loses its good effect when taken
in large quantity." - Lord Dunsany
David O'Lantern
> "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
I think I can....To paraphrase what I remember of Sartre's essay
"What is existentialism?" -- i.e. the parts I recall because they
were meant to be easy to understand, as opposed to that crap he
did in _Being and Nothingness_ -- "An existentialist is someone
who holds that Existence precedes Essence." If I recall right he
then goes on to distinguish humans from hand tools; I think the
example he used was scissors, that scissors are made as cutting
tools and that once you've grasped that you've got their secret,
wheras people aren't made for anything in particular and mostly
ain't very sharp. Or something like that: I'm afraid I've dulled
with age and use.
Anyway, the point of Existentialism is there's no human nature
we're born with, no innate knowledge or value system, and no
real reason why people have to think or act the way we do --
first we're born in France, say, then we're taught what "being
a Frenchman" is all about. All of which shades so neatly into
Foucault's Social Constructionism that I think Michel Foucault's
"inner essense" had very much in common with the younger Sartre,
not the fossil he was rebelling against by 1968. (Unlike say in
Foucault v. Chomsky c. '68, where Uncle Noam had some trouble
with the idea that moral standards were class- and perspective-
determined as opposed to being Universal Absolutes.)
Or something. Fuck if I know, I'm just typing away while sipping
cheap Chilean Chardonnay and listening to Tubular Bells II that
I downloaded for free from a P2P thingy.
But I still doubt I'm "an intellectual", though. For one thing,
I'm perfectly willing to admit that I might not really know what
I think I'm talking about.
But I can tell you where to look though: Sartre's essay "What is
Existentialism?" should be anthologized somewhere in your local
or college library, or you might be able to find it on the Net.
I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>
>
When did they live?
Are they better-known among the hoi polloi than William and Henry?
Nutmegger
"bob" wrote:::
> I'm a really slow thinker. Just like Bruce.
Who the hell is Bruce?
> Are you being vulgar?
You thought that was vulgar?
Oh no...........................
I will be up all night.
The peepers went quiet, the mutant frogs ate them.
Even the mockingbirds that sing at night are quiet.
The moon is bright and some planet is glittering a copper color in the
eastern sky.
The air is just right at 77F and feels nice on my skin but....
I will start to think of all the mutant frogs being born, and they will
crawl out of the bog and come leaping in the moonlight toward my home. The
frogs will start croaking their messages of despair and some will be covered
in slime that is supposed to be their eggs. The man at the University wants
these frogs. He is going to have to pay me to collect them. He puts them
in formaldehyde in jars in his office to show people the effects of DDT. An
office full of dead mutant frogs in jars. I decide to let the mutant frogs
go back to the bog. The man at the University couldn't pay me enough to
touch them. I wonder how they even survived this long with three eyes or
webbed feet growing out of their heads.
Let the mutant frog take over the bogs, the river, the whole state for all I
care.
It's just easier being considered vulgar.
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> >Bite me - I'm a cookie.
> You are recycling insults.
BUT BOB - it is my favorite one!
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
> [Do you get it yet?]
Yeah, I sending those mutant frogs down to Florida so you can listen to them
croak their song of despair and I can go to sleep.
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
<Ribbit>
jonah thomas
> Okay, maybe I'll have to do it this way: let's take a vote!
> Am I an intellectual? YES or NO?
Of course you are.
If you care whether you're an intellectual or not, and you don't deny
that you are one, then you are.
Robert J. Kolker
Steve Hayes wrote:
>
> Is "intellectual" the singular of "intelligentsia"?
No.
Bob Kolker
>
Robert J. Kolker
Steve Hayes wrote:
>>
>>Jesse and Frank, two outlaws.
>
>
> When did they live?
In the American west after the Civil War. Jesse was a member of
Cantrell's Raiders and Frank was Jesse's brother. They robbed banks,
killed people and shared some of their loot with poor folks. So they
acquired a "robin hood" reputation (purely undeserved).
>
> Are they better-known among the hoi polloi than William and Henry?
Yes.
Not one American in 20 knows who William and Henry James are.
Bob Kolker
>
>
>
>
G*rd*n
> > "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
David O'Lantern <thed...@shell.rawbw.com>:
> I think I can....To paraphrase what I remember of Sartre's essay
> "What is existentialism?" -- i.e. the parts I recall because they
> were meant to be easy to understand, as opposed to that crap he
> did in _Being and Nothingness_ -- "An existentialist is someone
> who holds that Existence precedes Essence." If I recall right he
> then goes on to distinguish humans from hand tools; I think the
> example he used was scissors, that scissors are made as cutting
> tools and that once you've grasped that you've got their secret,
> wheras people aren't made for anything in particular and mostly
> ain't very sharp. Or something like that: I'm afraid I've dulled
> with age and use.
>
> Anyway, the point of Existentialism is there's no human nature
> we're born with, no innate knowledge or value system, and no
> real reason why people have to think or act the way we do --
> first we're born in France, say, then we're taught what "being
> a Frenchman" is all about. All of which shades so neatly into
> Foucault's Social Constructionism that I think Michel Foucault's
> "inner essense" had very much in common with the younger Sartre,
> not the fossil he was rebelling against by 1968. (Unlike say in
> Foucault v. Chomsky c. '68, where Uncle Noam had some trouble
> with the idea that moral standards were class- and perspective-
> determined as opposed to being Universal Absolutes.)
If the word _intellectual_ is defined as above, one would
have to ask "To whom, and under what circumstances?" I
believe I could explain existentialism to the satisfaction
of my audience in a low tavern with a dozen well-chosen words,
whereas at an academic cocktail party, I'd have to put on a
more elaborate act lasting at least a minute or two, and if
writing a term paper for a course, I'd need to pull some
boilerplate off the Net to get the needed heft. None of
these would seem to fully qualify me as an _intellectual_;
I could arise from any of them to sell and install Nu-
Model Venetian Blinds.
> Or something. Fuck if I know, I'm just typing away while sipping
> cheap Chilean Chardonnay and listening to Tubular Bells II that
> I downloaded for free from a P2P thingy.
>
> But I still doubt I'm "an intellectual", though. For one thing,
> I'm perfectly willing to admit that I might not really know what
> I think I'm talking about.
>
> But I can tell you where to look though: Sartre's essay "What is
> Existentialism?" should be anthologized somewhere in your local
> or college library, or you might be able to find it on the Net.
> I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
> our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
> right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
> they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
First one needs to decide whether one is explaining what
_intellectual_ means, or what existentialism is, or potting
idle wisecracks at the sullen Net of a Saturday morning.
--
(<><>) /*/
}"{ G*rd*n }"{ g...@panix.com }"{
{ http://www.etaoin.com | latest new material 1/19/03 <-adv't
mazzolata
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 21:15:14 -0400, mazzolata <mazz...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
>>the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
>
>
> As opposed to?
>
>
congratulations, you passed.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ma chambre a la forme d'une cage
le soleil passe son bras par la fenetre
mazzolata
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 17:21:22 GMT, bob <than...@coldmail.nu> wrote:
>
>
>>"Robert J. Kolker" <bobk...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>David O'Lantern wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>>>
>>>If you have to ask, you are not one.
>>>
>>>Bob Kolker
>>
>>Bob, that was a silly response. BTW, do you believe that you are an
>>innerlechewal? Also, why do you sign posts with "Bob" but have
>>"Robert" in your name field? Does the "J" stand for Jehosephat?
>
>
> Is "intellectual" the singular of "intelligentsia"?
>
No, that would be intelligentsium.
mazzolata
Make that 200. Or even more - it's probably at least one in 50 just for
Henry, and most of those only saw one of the movies.
mazzolata
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Blue wrote:
>
>
>> "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
>
>
> I think I can..
But you didn't have to, really.
bob
wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 17:21:22 GMT, bob <than...@coldmail.nu> wrote:
>
>>"Robert J. Kolker" <bobk...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>David O'Lantern wrote:
>>>
>>>> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>>>
>>>If you have to ask, you are not one.
>>>
>>>Bob Kolker
>>
>>Bob, that was a silly response. BTW, do you believe that you are an
>>innerlechewal? Also, why do you sign posts with "Bob" but have
>>"Robert" in your name field? Does the "J" stand for Jehosephat?
>
>Is "intellectual" the singular of "intelligentsia"?
Do you have to be an intellectual to work for Intel?
jonah thomas
>>> "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
> If the word _intellectual_ is defined as above, one would
> have to ask "To whom, and under what circumstances?"
One may have to ask that, if one is an intellectual.
But when you aren't an intellectual you don't have to ask and you don't
have to tell.
bob
>"bob" wrote:::
>
>> I'm a really slow thinker. Just like Bruce.
>
>Who the hell is Bruce?
He's my new buddy.
>> Are you being vulgar?
>
>You thought that was vulgar?
Yes.
>Oh no...........................
My name is bob not bill.
>I will be up all night.
>The peepers went quiet, the mutant frogs ate them.
Chomp chomp.
>Even the mockingbirds that sing at night are quiet.
Do you feel mocked on other nights?
>The moon is bright and some planet is glittering a copper color in the
>eastern sky.
That would probably be mars and you were probably looking to the
south.
http://www.earthsky.com/Features/Skywatching/swg030725-n.html
>The air is just right at 77F and feels nice on my skin but....
>I will start to think of all the mutant frogs being born, and they will
>crawl out of the bog and come leaping in the moonlight toward my home.
Are these thoughts recurring? Are you a lonely person? Would you like
to meet Bruce?
>The
>frogs will start croaking their messages of despair and some will be covered
>in slime that is supposed to be their eggs. The man at the University wants
>these frogs. He is going to have to pay me to collect them. He puts them
>in formaldehyde in jars in his office to show people the effects of DDT. An
>office full of dead mutant frogs in jars. I decide to let the mutant frogs
>go back to the bog. The man at the University couldn't pay me enough to
>touch them. I wonder how they even survived this long with three eyes or
>webbed feet growing out of their heads.
>Let the mutant frog take over the bogs, the river, the whole state for all I
>care.
Have you been taking hallucinogens lately?
>
>It's just easier being considered vulgar.
That's not a good excuse.
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
>> >Bite me - I'm a cookie.
>> You are recycling insults.
>
>BUT BOB - it is my favorite one!
OK
>
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>>
>> [Do you get it yet?]
>
>Yeah, I sending those mutant frogs down to Florida so you can listen to them
>croak their song of despair and I can go to sleep.
A constant refrain? I don't think so.
>
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
>> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>
><Ribbit>
That's it.
bob
Can you really install venetian blinds? We have them here. I'm glad my
wife installed them before we met.
>> Or something. Fuck if I know, I'm just typing away while sipping
>> cheap Chilean Chardonnay and listening to Tubular Bells II that
>> I downloaded for free from a P2P thingy.
>>
>> But I still doubt I'm "an intellectual", though. For one thing,
>> I'm perfectly willing to admit that I might not really know what
>> I think I'm talking about.
>>
>> But I can tell you where to look though: Sartre's essay "What is
>> Existentialism?" should be anthologized somewhere in your local
>> or college library, or you might be able to find it on the Net.
>> I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
>> our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
>> right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
>> they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
>
>First one needs to decide whether one is explaining what
>_intellectual_ means, or what existentialism is, or potting
>idle wisecracks at the sullen Net of a Saturday morning.
Why?
G*rd*n
> >> > "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
David O'Lantern <thed...@shell.rawbw.com>:
> >> Or something. Fuck if I know, I'm just typing away while sipping
> >> cheap Chilean Chardonnay and listening to Tubular Bells II that
> >> I downloaded for free from a P2P thingy.
> >>
> >> But I still doubt I'm "an intellectual", though. For one thing,
> >> I'm perfectly willing to admit that I might not really know what
> >> I think I'm talking about.
> >>
> >> But I can tell you where to look though: Sartre's essay "What is
> >> Existentialism?" should be anthologized somewhere in your local
> >> or college library, or you might be able to find it on the Net.
> >> I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
> >> our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
> >> right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
> >> they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) wrote:
> >First one needs to decide whether one is explaining what
> >_intellectual_ means, or what existentialism is, or potting
> >idle wisecracks at the sullen Net of a Saturday morning.
bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
> Why?
I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
bob
You are joking, right?
G*rd*n
> >I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
> >their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
> >Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
> >precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
> You are joking, right?
Nothing could be further from my mind, except possibly
cleaning the cat box.
Lee Rudolph
>g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) wrote:
>> >I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
>> >their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
>> >Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
>> >precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
>
>bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
>> You are joking, right?
>
>Nothing could be further from my mind, except possibly
>cleaning the cat box.
A *real* intellectual is someone who can (but refuses to)
explain how cleaning the cat box collapses the wave function.
Keep that in, or perhaps out of your, mind.
Lee Rudolph
G*rd*n
> >> >I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
> >> >their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
> >> >Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
> >> >precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
> >> You are joking, right?
g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) writes:
> >Nothing could be further from my mind, except possibly
> >cleaning the cat box.
lrud...@panix.com (Lee Rudolph):
> A *real* intellectual is someone who can (but refuses to)
> explain how cleaning the cat box collapses the wave function.
>
> Keep that in, or perhaps out of your, mind.
I prefer the many-worlds theory, myself, for those worlds
where I put off cleaning the cat box.
What I'd really like to do is hook up the cat box to the Net.
Then the cat could post directly instead of telling me what
to write, and the need to clean the box would arise less
often (unless there were a lot of follow-ups).
Francis A. Miniter
>Can one be intellectual about anything? Can one be intellectual about
>baking cookies or the proper way to use toilet paper?
>
>Or, does subject and topic matter for intellectual debate?
>
>If someone tackles heavy subjects--literature, art, foreign policy
>debates--with plain language(say, Bronx accent), could he be a
>populist intellectual?
>
>
Further thoughts after a good night's sleep.
There is an intellectual approach to cooking. Almost exactly two years
ago, I was driving across New Jersey and listened to an interview with
an author who had just written a book about cooking. I wish I could
remember his name and the book title, but as I was driving I could not
write anything down at the time. He explained why things happened the
way they did in cooking. For instance:
When making french fries in oil, the first batch is never as good as the
later batches, and finally, after about 5 or 6 batches, they are again
no good. The reason is that the potatoes contain water and the initial
contact with pure oil results in a surface tension on the fry that
inhibits penetration of the fry by oil. By the time you make the second
batch, there has been some exchange of oil for water in the vat and
penetration of the oil occurs more rapidly, eliminating the mealy taste
of the first batch. By the time you reach the 5th or 6th batch, the
penetration of the oil occurs faster than the heating so that the fry
comes out shrunk and shriveled.
That I would say illustrates an intellectual's approach to cooking.
Francis A. Miniter
Michaela
There's a group named alt.support.lonliness?
; )
- Michaela
Lewis Mammel
"Francis A. Miniter" wrote:
>
> When making french fries in oil, the first batch is never as good as the
> later batches, and finally, after about 5 or 6 batches, they are again
> no good. The reason is that the potatoes contain water and the initial
> contact with pure oil results in a surface tension on the fry that
> inhibits penetration of the fry by oil. By the time you make the second
> batch, there has been some exchange of oil for water in the vat and
> penetration of the oil occurs more rapidly, eliminating the mealy taste
> of the first batch. By the time you reach the 5th or 6th batch, the
> penetration of the oil occurs faster than the heating so that the fry
> comes out shrunk and shriveled.
>
> That I would say illustrates an intellectual's approach to cooking.
So you swallowed this? Can't you think of any reasons to doubt this
explanation? Anyway, this is not my idea of an intellectual approach.
It's an attempt at scientific explanation of the type very commonly
indulged in by e.g. sports commentators when they make assertions about
the effect of atmospheric moisture etc.
Lew Mammel, Jr.
David O'Lantern
[...]
> The article was not an intellectual approach to the problem. The author
> did no homework, chose to believe what he wanted, regardless of evidence
> and published a non-factual declamation.
Sounds like CNN.
The
francis muir
<g...@panix.com> wrote:
> g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) wrote:
>>> I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
>>> their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
>>> Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
>>> precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
>
> bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
>> You are joking, right?
>
> Nothing could be further from my mind, except possibly
> cleaning the cat box.
A G*rd*n for me
A G*rd*n for me
If you're no' a G*rd*n
You're na' use to me.
tejas
"Robert J. Kolker" <bobk...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9rvUa.151907$H17.52476@sccrnsc02...
>
>
> Steve Hayes wrote:
>
> >>
> >>Jesse and Frank, two outlaws.
> >
> >
> > When did they live?
>
> In the American west after the Civil War. Jesse was a member of
> Cantrell's Raiders and Frank was Jesse's brother. They robbed banks,
> killed people and shared some of their loot with poor folks. So they
> acquired a "robin hood" reputation (purely undeserved).
Frank was the older one and it was in Missouri during the War of Northron
Aggro (or the Civil War) when the James' were part of Quantrill's
Raiders... a Southron guerilla band. Missouri was pure-d hell during that
period, extremely Balkanizedor more perhaps, like Ulster. Their mother was
said to have been killed when yankee partisans set the house she was in on
fire with a crude bomb. Their younger, half-wit, brother was also killed at
this time as I recall. The James boys had grudges even moreso after that.
See: http://www.sptddog.com/sotp/jesse.html
Or this more complete one..
http://www.angelfire.com/mi2/jamesyoungergang/timeline.html
--
Ted Samsel
maxpou...@post.com
> David O'Lantern:
> >
> > What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>
That sounds more like an "academic".
An "intellectual" is someone who contributes influential, original
ideas to the marketplace of ideas, an "academic" is someone who makes
a living repeating those.
Many academics incorrectly consider themsleves to be intellectuals.
Many innovators (e.g. Wilheim Reich) incorrectly consider themselves
to be original (e.g. Albert Einstein.)
This explains why the term has both a good and a bad reputation.
Steve Hayes
>Steve Hayes wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 21:15:14 -0400, mazzolata <mazz...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Saw a good definition today - an intellectual is someone who think that
>>>the James Brothers were called William and Henry.
>>
>>
>> As opposed to?
>>
>>
>
>congratulations, you passed.
Jessie and James on Pokémon don't count?
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: haye...@yahoo.com
Web: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm
Jac.m.a.m.Oppers
>David O'Lantern <thed...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message news:<2003072416...@shell.rawbw.com>...
>> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
>>
>>
>>
>> D.
>
> "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism. B.
intellectuals e.g. emerge from the shadows of palmtrees protecting
surfers allying other surfers on a gulf against the indignant language
and unhappy consciousness of a burning sun
Jac.
James Whitehead
its the tubular bells that did it-
the rest can be forgiven.
"David O'Lantern" <thed...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:2003072521...@shell.rawbw.com...
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Blue wrote:
>
> > "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
>
> I think I can....To paraphrase what I remember of Sartre's essay
> "What is existentialism?" -- i.e. the parts I recall because they
> were meant to be easy to understand, as opposed to that crap he
> did in _Being and Nothingness_ -- "An existentialist is someone
> who holds that Existence precedes Essence." If I recall right he
> then goes on to distinguish humans from hand tools; I think the
> example he used was scissors, that scissors are made as cutting
> tools and that once you've grasped that you've got their secret,
> wheras people aren't made for anything in particular and mostly
> ain't very sharp. Or something like that: I'm afraid I've dulled
> with age and use.
>
> Anyway, the point of Existentialism is there's no human nature
> we're born with, no innate knowledge or value system, and no
> real reason why people have to think or act the way we do --
> first we're born in France, say, then we're taught what "being
> a Frenchman" is all about. All of which shades so neatly into
> Foucault's Social Constructionism that I think Michel Foucault's
> "inner essense" had very much in common with the younger Sartre,
> not the fossil he was rebelling against by 1968. (Unlike say in
> Foucault v. Chomsky c. '68, where Uncle Noam had some trouble
> with the idea that moral standards were class- and perspective-
> determined as opposed to being Universal Absolutes.)
>
> Or something. Fuck if I know, I'm just typing away while sipping
> cheap Chilean Chardonnay and listening to Tubular Bells II that
> I downloaded for free from a P2P thingy.
>
> But I still doubt I'm "an intellectual", though. For one thing,
> I'm perfectly willing to admit that I might not really know what
> I think I'm talking about.
>
> But I can tell you where to look though: Sartre's essay "What is
> Existentialism?" should be anthologized somewhere in your local
> or college library, or you might be able to find it on the Net.
> I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
> our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
> right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
> they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
>
>
>
James Whitehead
"G*rd*n" <g...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:bfu7kl$si0$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> Blue:
> > Why?
>
> I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
> their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
> Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
> precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
>
>
then so am i - so THERE!
Nutmegger
"bob" wrote:::
> >> I'm a really slow thinker. Just like Bruce.
> >Who the hell is Bruce?
> He's my new buddy.
Glad to hear your making friends.
> >> Are you being vulgar?
> >You thought that was vulgar?
> Yes.
Whoa, who would've thought......
> >Oh no...........................
> My name is bob not bill.
I miss Mr. Bill.
> >I will be up all night.
> >The peepers went quiet, the mutant frogs ate them.
>
> Chomp chomp.
Another birds nest, this time in my hanging begonia. My cat sits on the
railing watching the bird, twitching her tail.
> >Even the mockingbirds that sing at night are quiet.
> Do you feel mocked on other nights?
Another Gemini - what is it with your clan?!
They all come my way!
I'm a Scorpio/Picies kind of girl.
Maybe even Taurus...depending.
But the twins - they're all a double-edged sword.
>
> >The moon is bright and some planet is glittering a copper color in the
> >eastern sky.
> That would probably be mars
Oh cool, I'll set up my telescope tonight then.
>and you were probably looking to the
> south.
Not true south, but it was the southeasterly sky.
>
> http://www.earthsky.com/Features/Skywatching/swg030725-n.html
>
Hey - I think you are right!
Thanks bob, that made my day.
> >The air is just right at 77F and feels nice on my skin but....
> >I will start to think of all the mutant frogs being born, and they will
> >crawl out of the bog and come leaping in the moonlight toward my home.
>
> Are these thoughts recurring? Are you a lonely person? Would you like
> to meet Bruce?
No, sometimes and no.
>
> >The
> >frogs will start croaking their messages of despair and some will be
covered
> >in slime that is supposed to be their eggs. The man at the University
wants
> >these frogs. He is going to have to pay me to collect them. He puts
them
> >in formaldehyde in jars in his office to show people the effects of DDT.
An
> >office full of dead mutant frogs in jars. I decide to let the mutant
frogs
> >go back to the bog. The man at the University couldn't pay me enough to
> >touch them. I wonder how they even survived this long with three eyes or
> >webbed feet growing out of their heads.
> >Let the mutant frog take over the bogs, the river, the whole state for
all I
> >care.
>
> Have you been taking hallucinogens lately?
No - it's just my imagination
running away with me
Oh-h-h-h-h, it's just my im-ag-in-ation!
> >It's just easier being considered vulgar.
> That's not a good excuse.
I promise to be a good girl from now on.
Towards you anyway.
> >> >Bite me - I'm a cookie.
> >> You are recycling insults.
> >BUT BOB - it is my favorite one!
> OK
You chip stealer, you!
> >> [Do you get it yet?]
> >Yeah, I sending those mutant frogs down to Florida so you can listen to
them
> >croak their song of despair and I can go to sleep.
>
> A constant refrain? I don't think so.
I finally did dose off somewhere around 3:30-4:00 am. I wore myself out
yesterday so sleep was no problem.
> >
> >> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> >> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> >
> >> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
> >> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
> >
> ><Ribbit>
>
> That's it.
Enough about frogs, lets discuss salamanders. Now, they are cute.
Nutmegger
"G*rd*n" wrote :::
in message news:bfufb5$o59$1...@panix1.panix.com...
> g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) wrote:
> > >> >I'm concerned lest David O'Lantern and those like him waste
> > >> >their time in activities which to not accomplish their purposes.
> > >> >Surely those who post on Usenet would not want to spend their
> > >> >precious minutes and their intellectual powers unwisely.
>
> bob <than...@coldmail.nu>:
> > >> You are joking, right?
>
> g...@panix.com (G*rd*n) writes:
> > >Nothing could be further from my mind, except possibly
> > >cleaning the cat box.
>
> lrud...@panix.com (Lee Rudolph):
> > A *real* intellectual is someone who can (but refuses to)
> > explain how cleaning the cat box collapses the wave function.
> >
> > Keep that in, or perhaps out of your, mind.
>
> I prefer the many-worlds theory, myself, for those worlds
> where I put off cleaning the cat box.
>
> What I'd really like to do is hook up the cat box to the Net.
> Then the cat could post directly instead of telling me what
> to write, and the need to clean the box would arise less
> often (unless there were a lot of follow-ups).
Would that be before or after you dust each slat of your venetian blinds
from all that cat litter dust?
Nutmegger
"jonah thomas" wrote :::
Ignorance is bliss.
Nutmegger
"Francis A. Miniter" wrote :::
> Steppenpup wrote:
>
> >Can one be intellectual about anything? Can one be intellectual about
> >baking cookies or the proper way to use toilet paper?
> >
> >Or, does subject and topic matter for intellectual debate?
> >
> >If someone tackles heavy subjects--literature, art, foreign policy
> >debates--with plain language(say, Bronx accent), could he be a
> >populist intellectual?
> >
> >
>
> Further thoughts after a good night's sleep.
>
>
> There is an intellectual approach to cooking.
Sure there is, you have to plan and shop for the exact ingredients, you have
to measure them out and mix them in a specified order, you have to cook in a
specifed way at a temperature as not to burn, and often times you may need
certain tools to prepare or cook the ingredients.
> Almost exactly two years
> ago, I was driving across New Jersey
Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is filled
up with industrial complexes?
>and listened to an interview with
> an author who had just written a book about cooking. I wish I could
> remember his name and the book title, but as I was driving I could not
> write anything down at the time. He explained why things happened the
> way they did in cooking. For instance:
>
>
> When making french fries in oil, the first batch is never as good as the
> later batches, and finally, after about 5 or 6 batches, they are again
> no good. The reason is that the potatoes contain water and the initial
> contact with pure oil results in a surface tension on the fry that
> inhibits penetration of the fry by oil. By the time you make the second
> batch, there has been some exchange of oil for water in the vat and
> penetration of the oil occurs more rapidly, eliminating the mealy taste
> of the first batch. By the time you reach the 5th or 6th batch, the
> penetration of the oil occurs faster than the heating so that the fry
> comes out shrunk and shriveled.
>
>
> That I would say illustrates an intellectual's approach to cooking.
> Francis A. Miniter
This leads me to another question.
How does intelligence relate to creativity? In cooking I've often just
threw in a dash of this, a smidette of that and I've made my own recipes.
Are intelligent people more creative?
Nutmegger
"Neill Massello" wrote:::
> Intellectuals are good talkers, but almost always make poor
> managers and leaders.
Do they make good lovers?
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> What IS "an intellectual" anyway, and am I one of those?
Do you read in restaurants? I often wonder if I am insulting the chef
if I don't put my book down when the food comes. On the other hand,
the book is often tastier than the food. I just came back from the South
and I discovered they can cook meat and sweet (tea, desserts), but they
are hopeless at vegetables. A Southerner is unwilling to let a sleeping
vegetable lie, they must decorate it with sauces, and fry it with
cheese and onions so that it unrecognizable.
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
>> "an intellectual" is someone who can explain existentialism.
> I think I can....To paraphrase what I remember of Sartre's essay
> "What is existentialism?"
I don't think you're an intellectual.
1. An intellectual would reach for his Heidegger, not his Sartre.
> I had a used paperback with that in it here, but at least one of
> our pet ferrets is in a foot-biting mood so I'm going to remain
> right here in my chair with my feet up off off the floor till
> they're quiet -- or till I have to pee very badly.
2. Intelletuals micturate.
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
>> Intellectuals are good talkers, but almost always make poor
>> managers and leaders.
> Do they make good lovers?
Obviously not, if you look at all the dumbass children out there.
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is filled
> up with industrial complexes?
New Jersey has cleverly laid all its highways through the crappy
part of the state. They keep the Garden part hidden away, I think mostly
from land-hungry New Yorkers.
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
I must admit I don't really know anything about existentialism
either, but half of the judo is deflecting your opponent's rapier
onto a topic you can blab about.
bob
wrote:
I thought this was pretty wild:
from http://www.islandnet.com/~the-gang/movies.htm
1908 The James Boys of Missouri, Essanay Film Co. (Silent Movie)
1911 Jesse James
1921 Jesse James Under the Black Flag starring Jesse Edward James
1922 Jesse James as the Outlaw, starring Jesse Edward James
1927 Jesse James, starring Fred Thompson
1939 Days of Jesse James, starring Roy Rogers
1939 Jesse James, starring Henry Fonda and Tyrone Power
1941 Jesse James at Bay, starring Roy Rogers
1941 Bad Men of Missouri
1942 The Remarkable Andrew
1946 Badman's Territory, starring Lawrence Tierney and Tom Tyler
1947 Jesse James Rides Again, starring Clayton Moore
1948 Adventures of Frank and Jesse James, starring Clayton Moore
1949 I shot Jesse James, starring Reed Haley and John Ireland
1949 Fighting Man of the Plains, starring Dale Robertson
1950 The James Brothers of Missouri, starring Keith Richards and
Robert Bice
1950 Kansas Raiders, starring Audie Murphy
1951 The Great Missouri Raid, Mc Donald Carey and Wendall Corey
1951 The Best of The Badmen, starring Lawrence Tierney and Tom
Tyler
1953 The Women They Almost Lynched, starring Ben Cooper
1953 The Great Jesse James Raid, starring Willard Parker
1954 Jesse James vs. The Daltons, starring Brett King
1954 Jesse James' Women, starring Don "Red" Barry
1957 The True Story of Jesse James, starring Robert Wagner
1957 Hell's Crossroads, starring Henry Brandon and Douglas Kennedy
1959 Alias Jesse James, starring Wendell Corey
1960 Young Jesse James, starring Ray Stricklyn and Robert Dix
1965 The Outlaw is Coming, starring Wayne Mack
1966 Jesse James vs Frankenstein's Daughter, starring John Lupton
1969 A Time for Dying, Audie Murphy
1972 The Great Northfield Raid, starring Robert Duvall
1980 The Long Riders starring the Keach and Carridine Brothers
1980? The Last Days of Frank and Jesse James, starring Kris
Kristofferson and
Johnny Cash
1991 Young Riders, starring Christopher Pettiet
1995 Frank and Jesse, starring Rob Low and Bill Paxton and Randy
Travis
mazzolata
>
> Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is filled
> up with industrial complexes?
It's in the British sense of garden meaning 'backyard'.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ma chambre a la forme d'une cage
le soleil passe son bras par la fenetre
mazzolata
> No your not!
"You're", abbr. of "you are".
"Your", belonging to you.
mazzolata
>
> intellectuals e.g. emerge from the shadows of palmtrees protecting
> surfers allying other surfers on a gulf against the indignant language
> and unhappy consciousness of a burning sun
>
> Jac.
>
There you go.
mazzolata
I guess you're posting from the gen-x n.g. ...
James Whitehead
<tomca...@yaNOSPAMhoo.com> wrote in message
news:bg0msi$uk$1...@news1.radix.net...
From memory i dont think a rapier was a part of the equipment used in judo.
But we might like to consider Maddox Brown's Work where the intellectuals
appear stage right- one of whom i think is Carlyle.
http://science.csustan.edu/JTB/FINE-ART/HISTORIC/ART-SRC/Brown-Work.jpg
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> From memory i dont think a rapier was a part of the equipment used in judo.
> But we might like to consider Maddox Brown's Work where the intellectuals
> appear stage right- one of whom i think is Carlyle.
> http://science.csustan.edu/JTB/FINE-ART/HISTORIC/ART-SRC/Brown-Work.jpg
I must've been thinking of extreme judo. From your painting, maybe an
intellectual is someone who rests on his shovel while others dig?
bob
>> >> I'm a really slow thinker. Just like Bruce.
>> >Who the hell is Bruce?
>> He's my new buddy.
>Glad to hear your making friends.
He seems to have stopped responding. Maybe it was wrong of me to think
of him as a friend. I am starting to relate to the Cable Guy
character.
>> >> Are you being vulgar?
>> >You thought that was vulgar?
>> Yes.
>Whoa, who would've thought......
Me.
>> >Oh no...........................
>> My name is bob not bill.
>I miss Mr. Bill.
Watch reruns.
>> >I will be up all night.
>> >The peepers went quiet, the mutant frogs ate them.
>> Chomp chomp.
>Another birds nest, this time in my hanging begonia. My cat sits on the
>railing watching the bird, twitching her tail.
Get her a ladder.
>> >Even the mockingbirds that sing at night are quiet.
>> Do you feel mocked on other nights?
>Another Gemini - what is it with your clan?!
What are you talking about? Oh, I know. You *met* someone.
>They all come my way!
I didn't come your way. You came my way.
>I'm a Scorpio/Picies kind of girl.
>Maybe even Taurus...depending.
Yadda yadda.
>But the twins - they're all a double-edged sword.
Bummer, eh?
>> >The moon is bright and some planet is glittering a copper color in the
>> >eastern sky.
>> That would probably be mars
>Oh cool, I'll set up my telescope tonight then.
Enjoy.
>>and you were probably looking to the
>> south.
>Not true south, but it was the southeasterly sky.
>>
>> http://www.earthsky.com/Features/Skywatching/swg030725-n.html
>
>Hey - I think you are right!
>Thanks bob, that made my day.
Time for the downward spiral!
>> >The air is just right at 77F and feels nice on my skin but....
>> >I will start to think of all the mutant frogs being born, and they will
>> >crawl out of the bog and come leaping in the moonlight toward my home.
>> Are these thoughts recurring? Are you a lonely person? Would you like
>> to meet Bruce?
>No, sometimes and no.
He might become a positive influence in your life. He probably sucks
in some areas though, IYKWIM. Too much maternal influence
developmentally. You might be able to help him out. OK, I'll stop. I'm
grossing myself out.
>> >It's just easier being considered vulgar.
>> That's not a good excuse.
>I promise to be a good girl from now on.
>Towards you anyway.
That's nice.
>> >> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> >> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>> >
>> >> Please be so kind as to refrain from attempting to engage me in a
>> >> vulgar conversation from this point forward.
>> >
>> ><Ribbit>
>> That's it.
>Enough about frogs, lets discuss salamanders. Now, they are cute.
Let's discuss salivators instead.
bob
- or not
James Whitehead
"mazzolata" <mazz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3F23F0A4...@hotmail.com...
> James Whitehead wrote:
> > No your not!
>
> "You're", abbr. of "you are".
> "Your", belonging to you.
>
offered two definitions one of You're and one of Your, maybe implying a
criticism - maybe not? but - and let me continue guessing *you are* trying
to say something - you seem to be saying that my use is wrong? and yet can
in order to see it as being wrong see its intended meaning? Your (you are)
also implying that error can be exposed corrected by reference to a
dictionary. I could say that my use of 'your' has attracted attention
before, and that i'm well aware of my mistaken use, which is mostly not
deliberate, and could discuss the need of others pointing this out, but that
doesnt interest me here, now, but what strikes me is that 'Your' means
something belongs to you and the you are gives being as the thing posed by
the you, now it was just such that i pointed to.
Your not - that is it doesn't belong to you - at present- that 'youve
offered any thought' on what i was saying. My question to you then is when
is it i can use 'your' in the way i do as it gives its meaning, what
characteristic need i before i can use language in the way in which, which
in the above was not intended to confuse and was apparently clear enough?
bob
wrote:
>Nutmegger wrote:
>
>>
>> Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is filled
>> up with industrial complexes?
>
>It's in the British sense of garden meaning 'backyard'.
I thought it was a euphemism for outhouse.
James Whitehead
<tomca...@yaNOSPAMhoo.com> wrote in message
news:bg0til$uk$3...@news1.radix.net...
They are according to Maddox Brown 'Brain workers' and of a kin to the
Navies, and of better repute than the lords and ladies on horse back.
But the judo thing made me smile as i remember we had to all fight the
master at the end of a lesson - and though a sword would not have given me
any much more of a chance maybe a Uzi? Or small armoured car?
bob
>In rec.arts.books James Whitehead <Abx4...@jjh76g7856gh.com> wrote:
>
>> From memory i dont think a rapier was a part of the equipment used in judo.
>> But we might like to consider Maddox Brown's Work where the intellectuals
>> appear stage right- one of whom i think is Carlyle.
>> http://science.csustan.edu/JTB/FINE-ART/HISTORIC/ART-SRC/Brown-Work.jpg
>
>I must've been thinking of extreme judo.
Maybe you were thinking about Gumdo (I doubt it) or about Jiu Jitsu
which was a form developed for use when one lost their sword. Or maybe
(most likely) you were thinking about the ninja turtles.
>From your painting, maybe an
>intellectual is someone who rests on his shovel while others dig?
That would be a manager.
Lewis Mammel
Nutmegger wrote:
>
> Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is filled
> up with industrial complexes?
It was famous for "truck farming", back in the day. Plus, it has
the Garden State Parkway.
James Whitehead
"bob" <than...@coldmail.nu> wrote in message
news:v108ivogrj8ri0gj9...@4ax.com...
No the manager wouldn't have a shovel - so he'd have borrow one - and then
ask why the lender wasn't digging....
Lewis Mammel
mazzolata wrote:
>
> James Whitehead wrote:
> > No your not!
>
> "You're", abbr. of "you are".
> "Your", belonging to you.
Unless he meant "Know your knot!"
David O'Lantern
> Would that be before or after you dust each slat of your venetian blinds
> from all that cat litter dust?
Don't they sell "Yesterday's News" in your state? It's litter made from
recycled news paper. No dust!
I found out about that the intellectual way: my roommate looked it up
on the World Wide Web!
The
--
"Reaching after something, touching nothing, is all I ever do."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
David O'Lantern
[...]
> is it i can use 'your' in the way i do as it gives its meaning,
> what characteristic need i before i can use language in the way
> in which, which in the above was not intended to confuse and was
> apparently clear enough?
No, nothing you posted was in any way clear enough.
(See, whether I'm "an intellectual" or not, I sho' am a pedant!)
David O'Lantern
[...]
> maybe an intellectual is someone who rests on his shovel
"Intellectuals micturate."
D.
David O'Lantern
[...]
> A Southerner is unwilling to let a sleeping vegetable lie,
> they must decorate it with sauces, and fry it with cheese
> and onions so that it unrecognizable.
Just once, add to your salad some RAW okra. Oh, yummy.
Nutmegger
you like that character in the Dr. Suess book who takes his spots off and
puts them everywhere?
Or are you in NJ?
<Sorry, couldn't resist!>
<tomca...@yaNOSPAMhoo.com> wrote:::
> > Side note: Why do they call New Jersey "The Garden State" when it is
filled
> > up with industrial complexes?
>
> New Jersey has cleverly laid all its highways through the crappy
> part of the state.
No doubt, but even the beaches I went to were filthy. I want to see the
Gardens - where the hell are they?
>They keep the Garden part hidden away, I think mostly
> from land-hungry New Yorkers.
Luckily, I'm not a New Yorker either. Got one in my family now - through
marriage - and if that isn't bad enough - I don't know what is. I want to
tell her to talk through her nose some more 'cause I just can't understand a
single word she says. But, at least it gets me off the hook from talking to
her because I really don't give a shit about what is on sale at Macys this
week.
Nutmegger
"David O'Lantern" wrote:::
> Nutmegger wrote:
>
>
> > Would that be before or after you dust each slat of your venetian blinds
> > from all that cat litter dust?
>
> Don't they sell "Yesterday's News" in your state?
I have never seen it. I use "Tidy Cat 3."
>It's litter made from
> recycled news paper. No dust!
I'm sure the print gets all over kitty's paws and then when s/he licks them
clean.......
>
> I found out about that the intellectual way: my roommate looked it up
> on the World Wide Web!
You've gone from love of your life to now.....roommate?!
Oh, and where the hell else but usenet can people talk about being
considered an intellectual, and have the conversation turn over to cat
litter.