A question about Nick Andros
Mark Atkins
I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
mute. Sure, he was clever and highly witty in the story, and could produce
some good opinions and resourceful conceptions, and he was also one of the
first to arrive at Mother Abigail's holy doorstep, but none of that strides
the fact of his physical indisposition. What I'm saying is this: Didn't any
of the people in the ad hoc committee (such as Stu, or Glen, or Frannie)
realise that a hearing-impaired mute would slow them all down in their
meetings of business, seeing he would have to write notes every time he
wanted to share an opinion, and seeing he had to focus on the right set of
lips each time somebody said something?
Therefore, why did King decide to make his character, Nick, a part of that
regime?
There were, in the novel, hundreds of people in the Free Zone at this point
in the story - and half of them were probably just as if not smarter than
Nick. So, why would they slow themselves down with a deaf mute when they
could have just picked one of the other citizens (who could speak and
listen in a co-ordinated fashion) to play the part.
Sure, Nick Andros was an important part of the story, and he therefore
deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was the
most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in the
centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf and
dumb person)??? It just confused me totally.
Did I miss something along the line of King's reasoning on this matter in
the book, at all?
Reply if you have any opinions on this idea.
Thanx! :-)
Mark.E
xx...@dial.pipex.com
Dollfin330
>
>I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
>committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>mute.
<snip>
>Didn't any
>of the people in the ad hoc committee (such as Stu, or Glen, or Frannie)
>realise that a hearing-impaired mute would slow them all down in their
>meetings of business,
<snip>
>
>Therefore, why did King decide to make his character, Nick, a part of that
>regime?
Seems to me that SK maybe wanted to demonstrate that just
because someone has a handicap, it doesnt mean that they
cant get the job done.
Just because someone is deaf it doesnt mean they cant handle
a large amount of responsiblity.
>
>Did I miss something along the line of King's reasoning on this matter in
>the book, at all?
Yeah... I think maybe you did... King doesnt descriminate.
^^^Eva^^^
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Take a look to the sky
Just before you die
Its the last time you will
-(\/)etallicA-
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Lucian Hontau
Mark Atkins wrote:
> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
> mute.
Why not? Should they have chosen a less qualified memebr just because he
couldn't hear or speak? He was probably the most qualified for the position in
the first place, out of all the Free Zone comitee members.
Besides, he was *chosen* to lead them. If any of the other countless valid
reasons don't convince you, this last one should.
--
Lucian Hontau | mailto:gam...@stealth.com.au
"You’re a firestarter, honey. Just one great, big Zippo lighter." - Andy McGee
(Firestarter, Stephen King)
Augustine
Mark Atkins wrote:
> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>
> mute. Sure, he was clever and highly witty in the story, and could
> produce
> some good opinions and resourceful conceptions, and he was also one of
> the
> first to arrive at Mother Abigail's holy doorstep, but none of that
> strides
> the fact of his physical indisposition. What I'm saying is this:
> Didn't any
> of the people in the ad hoc committee (such as Stu, or Glen, or
> Frannie)
> realise that a hearing-impaired mute would slow them all down in their
>
> meetings of business, seeing he would have to write notes every time
> he
> wanted to share an opinion, and seeing he had to focus on the right
> set of
> lips each time somebody said something?
>
> Therefore, why did King decide to make his character, Nick, a part of
> that
> regime?
>
> There were, in the novel, hundreds of people in the Free Zone at this
> point
> in the story - and half of them were probably just as if not smarter
> than
> Nick. So, why would they slow themselves down with a deaf mute when
> they
> could have just picked one of the other citizens (who could speak and
> listen in a co-ordinated fashion) to play the part.
>
> Sure, Nick Andros was an important part of the story, and he therefore
>
> deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was
> the
> most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in
> the
> centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf
> and
> dumb person)??? It just confused me totally.
>
> Did I miss something along the line of King's reasoning on this matter
> in
> the book, at all?
>
> Reply if you have any opinions on this idea.
>
> Thanx! :-)
>
> Mark.E
> xx...@dial.pipex.com
I think you missed the point of who was on the ad-hoc committee. It
was made up of "special" people. Those who led their group to Boulder
(Nick and Ralph led their group, Frannie, Stu, Glen, and Larry led
theirs). Those who were destined by God to lead the good vs. the evil.
And I think Nick Andros was exceptionally smart. Think about it, a lot
of the survivors did sidn't seem all that bright. They weren't
geniuses, certainly, and Nick had a special kind of intelligence. He
had great ideas and opinions on what to do about the city, the people,
and Flagg. Overall, he was chossen because he was choosen. Mother
Abigail knew he was to be a leader. She frequently thought about what a
great leader he was, and she even said on her deathbed that she thought
it would be Nick that led the party to Vegas.
I think Nick was a great choice.
Chris Augustine
Rob Clark
Mark Atkins wrote:
> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
> mute. Sure, he was clever and highly witty in the story, and could produce
> some good opinions and resourceful conceptions, and he was also one of the
> first to arrive at Mother Abigail's holy doorstep, but none of that strides
> the fact of his physical indisposition. What I'm saying is this: Didn't any
> of the people in the ad hoc committee (such as Stu, or Glen, or Frannie)
> realise that a hearing-impaired mute would slow them all down in their
> meetings of business, seeing he would have to write notes every time he
> wanted to share an opinion, and seeing he had to focus on the right set of
> lips each time somebody said something?
>
> Therefore, why did King decide to make his character, Nick, a part of that
> regime?
>
> There were, in the novel, hundreds of people in the Free Zone at this point
> in the story - and half of them were probably just as if not smarter than
> Nick. So, why would they slow themselves down with a deaf mute when they
> could have just picked one of the other citizens (who could speak and
> listen in a co-ordinated fashion) to play the part.
Yes there were probably quite a few people in the town who were
just as clever and resourceful as Nick and weren't saddled with a
disability. However Nick was close to Mother Abagail, and as such
most people not only knew him, but trusted him
Would you rather follow someone you knew, respected and could trust;
or take orders from a complete stranger?
Also, it takes more than smarts to be in charge. You have to
be able to lead others, and others have to be willing to be led
by you. Nick had already demonstrated that he could lead
and others already looked to him for direction. How many
others could that be said for?
Finally, setting up the ad-hoc committe was the first step towards
re-creating America. What kind of America would it be if they were
to begin by saying "Sorry Nick, you're a bright guy and all, people like
and respect you, but having you as one of our founding fathers would
only slow us down." Efficiency was Flagg's gig, humanity was the
Free Zone's.
-Rob
remove *NOSPAM* to reply
DavidEvan
>I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
>committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>mute. Sure, he was clever and highly witty in the story, and could produce
>some good opinions and resourceful conceptions, and he was also one of the
>first to arrive at Mother Abigail's holy doorstep, but none of that strides
>the fact of his physical indisposition.
<snipped the rest>
I think you answered your own question Mark; he was clever and could produce
good opinions and resourceful conceptions...What I hear you saying is that he
should have been excluded because of his disability. I mean you start out
giving good reasons why he should be there, and then give a bunch of crap by
saying, "Well, he would "slow them down", etc.. In other words, you say that
unless you are "perfectly normal" (which is really just 98.6 anyway) , you
should not be allowed to do anything that is important or that really matters.
Talk about a total lack of compassion! I hope to God that you never get a
disability besides your mental one. I walk with a cane-should I not be allowed
to go anywhere with friends because I will "slow them down"? Wasnt it
Roosevelt that was president yet in a wheelchair? Gee why-there were "lots of
others around". I'm sorry we are not all golden boys and girls, but maybe we
shine in other ways.
And get it straight dude; Nick was not hearing impaired-he was
*DEAF*-there's a world of difference.
David
Zera
> And get it straight dude; Nick was not hearing impaired-he was
> *DEAF*-there's a world of difference.
> David
Wouldn't you say being Deaf is an impairment?
Andrea Martell
Mark Atkins (xx...@dial.pipex.com) wrote:
> Did I miss something along the line of King's reasoning on this matter in
> the book, at all?
> Reply if you have any opinions on this idea.
My guess is that King was trying to right a lot of the prejudices
from the old world. Sort of like world war 1 blurred a lot of class
relations since death does not discriminate against classes. With most of
the population wiped out, those that seemed touched with talent (as nick
was) were more important and worth the time despite his disability. Nick's
character added a lot of heart to the story.....and it was nice to see
that when electing the new world leaders...people looked passed
appearances...and instead looked at talent and character.....
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Dawn Martell Third Year Journalism
Web page://chat.carleton.ca/~amartell Update: February 24, 1998
"She is a friend of my mind. She gather me, man. The pieces I am, she
gather them and give them back to me in all the right order. It's good,
you know, when you got a woman who is a friend of your mind."- Beloved
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Dancer
Zera wrote in message <6ek558$8...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
I think the point is that having some hearing problems isn't quite the same
as having no hearing what-so-ever.
Brad
JGM
Augustine wrote:
> I think you missed the point of who was on the ad-hoc committee. It
> was made up of "special" people. Those who led their group to Boulder
> (Nick and Ralph led their group, Frannie, Stu, Glen, and Larry led
> theirs). Those who were destined by God to lead the good vs. the evil.
I think Chris has hit closest to the mark so far. Some themes in The
Stand kind of presaged the New Age movement: the Las Vegas group was
more organized, technically competent, and had more "smart people" than
the Boulder group, while the Boulderites relied on (or at least
succumbed to) their intuition and feelings in making decisions, and had
to muddle through the reconstruction projects in a haphazard way. And
Nick exemplified the whole Boulder community: something of a "reject"
but highly intuitive and full of empathy and spirit.
I think that at at least one point, the committee members think about
and comment on their own rag-tag nature, and acknowledge the fact that
forces beyond their control had acted to bring them together.
Jim
Rocker1018
>Sure, Nick Andros was an important part of the story, and he therefore
>deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was the
>most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in the
>centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf and
>dumb person)??? It just confused me totally.
I think Nick was chosen for a very simple reason. He was one of "The Chosen."
He had dreams of Mother Abigall and of the dark man. He was an important
part of the new regime and for that reason it was decided that he should join
with Stu, Larry, ect... as a part of the council.
his handicap should in no way effect the decision to join the group. This
should not even be a question in the real world. A person who is handicapped
can do just as good a job as anyone else, be just as smart as anyone else, just
as important as anyone else, and in Nick's case know more than most of everyone
else in the Colorado community.
His handicap helped him associate with Tom Cullen and it was he who helped
Cullen, after his death, to save Stu's life. Nick was a very important
character and one in which things would have turned out much differently if
there were prejudice against his handicaps.
Shawn
DavidEvan
> Nick was not hearing impaired-he was
>> *DEAF*-there's a world of difference.
>> David
>
>Wouldn't you say being Deaf is an impairment?
You're very right Zera, but in this case hearing impaired is used to describe
those of us that are not completely deaf, but have difficulty with hearing. I
think the distinction is important. For a long time people did not fully
understand this distinction; f'rinstance: at a recent state meeting here in
Washington the chairman was asked if there would be any assisted listening
devices available for the hard of hearing. He said "No problem, we'll be glad
to bring in a sign language interpretor". Most hard of hearing people don't
use sign language, but the deaf do. Not that the guy was necessarily at
fault-he just wasn't aware.
I guess being hard of hearing makes me a little sensitive sometimes and leads
me to feel that it is my job to educate the world-which of course it isn't'.
End of lecture. Now returning control of your newsgroup reader:)
David
Jon R.
Mark Atkins wrote:
>
> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
You've gotten some answers already, some of which are quite hostile
towards what is a good questJon. We know how the world works. How
did the people of Boulder manage to look past their beliefs and
elect a deafmute?
Well, one thing is word of mouth. Surely everyone had heard of
that deaf guy who led a group of people to town. "Deaf? And he
still did that? Got to be something special about that kid."
The other, more important thing is the way the election was done.
There was a reading of candidates, chosen among Stu and Co., and
then Harold Lauder suggests that these candidates are chosen by
acclamatJon. In the spirit of a small community in progress, this
happens. I believe Nick would have had problems with being elected
if this had happened in more democratic ways as we know them, where
other people had the time to collect support. Although for the
reasons listed above, he would be better off than, say, Frannie.
Jon R.
Jared Head
Jon R. (Jon.R...@nor.uib.noXXX) wrote:
: Mark Atkins wrote:
: >
: > I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
: > committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
: > mute.(snip)
:
: You've gotten some answers already, some of which are quite hostile
: towards what is a good questJon. We know how the world works. How
: did the people of Boulder manage to look past their beliefs and
: elect a deafmute?
Well, it does happen in real life too. Our Minister for Education is
blind, and I don't think many people had to look past their beliefs to
vote for him. (Well, socialists might have had to, but that's a different
can of worms.)
Jared
--
Jared Head at the Department of Biochemistry, University of Bristol
"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human
history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila."
Mitch Ratliffe
stevie canuck
Jon R. wrote:
> Mark Atkins wrote:
>> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
>> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>> mute.(snip)
> You've gotten some answers already, some of which are quite hostile
> towards what is a good questJon.
It wasn't so much the content of the question, Jon, as it was the
exceptionally and repetitively derogatory tone used in framing the
question. The use of the word "dummy" was particularly off putting, IMO.
The only reason I didn't respond to the original post, was that several
others had already made the point quite effectively.
Stevie C
to e-mail me change .com to .ca
Grrl from Gilead
Mark Atkins wrote:
>
> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
> mute.
> deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was the
> most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in the
> centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf and
> dumb person)???
Nick Andros played an important role in the book. He is essential to
the making of the Free-Zone committee. His was the first group to meet
Mother Abigail. He was a strong character and he was compassionate.
He took care of Tom Cullen before and after his death. I was sadden
that he died and I am sure many other readers were as well. His
handicap did not hold him back, I think he gained more respect from
the others because of it.
He was not a *dummy* as you put it, therefore you are no better then
the men who beat Nick up when we first met him in the book.
Maybe you should learn some compassion since you have no repect for
people with disabilities. You might be in a situation where you have a
handicap. Wouldn't you want people to have some compassion for you?
Think about it.
Grrl From Gilead
'Nuf said.
CRY1414
does anyone have any dirt on Stephen King in here?
Null
In article <199803180238...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, cry...@aol.com (CRY1414) wrote:
>does anyone have any dirt on Stephen King in here?
Sadly, no. All my drive-by muddings have been overwhelmingly
unsuccessful.
loriloribobori
On 18 Mar 1998 02:38:59 GMT, cry...@aol.com (CRY1414) wrote:
>does anyone have any dirt on Stephen King in here?
nope... but i hear that over in alt.ima.goober.so.lemme.havit they've
managed to filch a couple of his old mud pies.
loriloribobori
remove "x" in "next" to e-mail.
:Ş
DavidEvan
>does anyone have any dirt on Stephen King in here?
Is this really you Kenneth Starr?
~Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis,
ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.~
-I have a catapult. Give me all the money or I will fling an enormous rock
at your head.
Jon R.
stevie canuck wrote:
>
> Jon R. wrote:
>
> > Mark Atkins wrote:
>
> >> I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> >> committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>
> > You've gotten some answers already, some of which are quite hostile
> > towards what is a good questJon.
>
> It wasn't so much the content of the question, Jon, as it was the
> exceptionally and repetitively derogatory tone used in framing the
> question. The use of the word "dummy" was particularly off putting, IMO.
>
> The only reason I didn't respond to the original post, was that several
> others had already made the point quite effectively.
Well, I gave it the benefit of the doubt, as well as adressing some
points I felt were overlooked. I _think_ the poster tried to
describe how the people of Boulder were apt to think about Nick.
Answers like "Stephen King doesn't discriminate" are answers to
a different questJon than the one asked here, IMO.
Jon R.
Jon R.
Jared Head wrote:
>
> Jon R. (Jon.R...@nor.uib.noXXX) wrote:
(snip) We know how the world works. How
> : did the people of Boulder manage to look past their beliefs and
> : elect a deafmute?
>
> Well, it does happen in real life too. Our Minister for Education is
> blind, and I don't think many people had to look past their beliefs to
> vote for him. (Well, socialists might have had to, but that's a different
> can of worms.)
Yes, I know. We have a minister of environmental issues who's a
cripple. Only in Europe, eh?
Jon R.
Jon R.
Grrl from Gilead wrote:
>
> Mark Atkins wrote:
> >
> > I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
> > committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
> > Sure, Nick Andros was an important part of the story, and he therefore
> > deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was the
> > most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in the
> > centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf and
> > dumb person)???
> the men who beat Nick up when we first met him in the book.
> Maybe you should learn some compassion since you have no repect for
> people with disabilities. You might be in a situation where you have a
> handicap. Wouldn't you want people to have some compassion for you?
>
> Think about it.
This really makes me sad. 'Dummy' refers to what people say. See
the quotation marks?
Mark is no better than the violent attackers from the book? Sheesh.
I think John Smith ought to give you some lessons.
Jon R.
stevie canuck
Jon R. wrote:
> Grrl from Gilead wrote:
> > Mark Atkins wrote:
>>>I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
>>>committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
>>> mute.
(snippage)
>> He was not a *dummy* as you put it, therefore you are no better then
>> the men who beat Nick up when we first met him in the book.
>> Maybe you should learn some compassion since you have no repect for
>> people with disabilities. You might be in a situation where you have a
>> handicap. Wouldn't you want people to have some compassion for you?
>> Think about it.
> This really makes me sad. 'Dummy' refers to what people say. See
> the quotation marks?
> Mark is no better than the violent attackers from the book? Sheesh.
> I think John Smith ought to give you some lessons.
I honestly think you are mistaken Jon ... taking the rose tinted view as
it were. I don't think there is any doubt that the original poster was
denigrating individuals who have sensory disabilities. The use of the
word "dummy", quotation marks or no was the give away, IMO.
Grrl from Gilead
Jon R. wrote:
>
> Grrl from Gilead wrote:
> >
> > Mark Atkins wrote:
> > >
> > He was not a *dummy* as you put it, therefore you are no better then
> > the men who beat Nick up when we first met him in the book.
> > Maybe you should learn some compassion since you have no repect for
> > people with disabilities. You might be in a situation where you have a
> > handicap. Wouldn't you want people to have some compassion for you?
> >
> > Think about it.
>
> This really makes me sad. 'Dummy' refers to what people say. See
> the quotation marks?
>
> Mark is no better than the violent attackers from the book? Sheesh.
> I think John Smith ought to give you some lessons.
>
> Jon R.
Oh....Okay...so what you're implying is that it's alright to call
handicapped people by derogatory names. Poke them with sticks and yell
"cripple, dummy, or retard." That's okay with you, huh? We are all
entitled to our opinions. You have your opinion and I have mine.
I wasn't implying that Mark was violent, he was just displaying the same
attitude most *normal* people have towards the handicapped. The
assailants in the book were displaying their own attitudes (spurred by
their own backwards ignorance)with violence. Some people use words to
hurt fellow human beings, some use violence.
Grrl From Gilead
Point-of-aim/Point-of-impact
In <01bd510a$b64463a0$LocalHost@default> "Mark Atkins"
<xx...@dial.pipex.com> writes:
>
>I was just wondering if anybody could explain to me WHY the Free Zone
>committee, in Stephen King's novel The Stand, would've included a deaf
produce
>some good opinions and resourceful conceptions, and he was also one of
the
>first to arrive at Mother Abigail's holy doorstep, but none of that
strides
Didn't any
>of the people in the ad hoc committee (such as Stu, or Glen, or
Frannie)
>realise that a hearing-impaired mute would slow them all down in their
>meetings of business, seeing he would have to write notes every time
he
>wanted to share an opinion, and seeing he had to focus on the right
set of
>lips each time somebody said something?
>
>Therefore, why did King decide to make his character, Nick, a part of
that
>regime?
Man, the implications that arise from your questioning this
situation are kind of chilling. You make it seem like you're unable to
see the worth of anyone except those who have all their human
facilities. The simple fact that Nick Andros is, as you said, "clever
and witty," is evidence of just HOW intelligent he IS. Learning
English despite being deaf and mute had got to be quite a challenge.
Why don't you try to imagine *THINKING* without the benefit of being
able to hear concrete words in your head. If you've never heard them,
how can you think thoughts in the form of coherent sentences? Yet Nick
is able to do this. And you think he's somehow unworthy?
I think he's probably one of the MOST qualified. You are ready to
cast him aside--along with any leadership ability or great ideas he
might have--simply because he has to write his thoughts down to get
them heard??? That's a pretty ignorant position, if I may say so. If
what you said were true, there would not be deaf college students. You
would have to, by extension, keep deaf students out of public schools
because they're a waste of resources and the time of teachers and other
students. Deaf people could be considered a liability in the corporate
board room. Are you that prejudiced? Have you never heard of a sign
language interpreter? Even if Nick didn't know sign language, he could
have a LIP-READING interpreter repeating (silently) everything just
about as it's said. Doesn't sound too difficult to have that done. Is
your imagination that limited that you couldn't think of that?
>There were, in the novel, hundreds of people in the Free Zone at this
point
>in the story - and half of them were probably just as if not smarter
than
>Nick. So, why would they slow themselves down with a deaf mute when
they
>could have just picked one of the other citizens (who could speak and
>listen in a co-ordinated fashion) to play the part.
>
>Sure, Nick Andros was an important part of the story, and he therefore
>deserved the roles he got - but a 'dummy' playing a part in what was
the
>most nontrivial administration-committee in the world, smack-down in
the
>centre of a growing population of eight-hundred survivors (as a deaf
and
>dumb person)??? It just confused me totally.
>
>Did I miss something along the line of King's reasoning on this matter
in
>the book, at all?
>
>Reply if you have any opinions on this idea.
>
>Thanx! :-)
>
>Mark.E
>xx...@dial.pipex.com
*I'll* say you're missing something...
--Azure
Jon R.
Grrl from Gilead wrote:
>
> Jon R. wrote:
(snip)
> > This really makes me sad. 'Dummy' refers to what people say. See
> > the quotation marks?
> Oh....Okay...so what you're implying is that it's alright to call
> handicapped people by derogatory names. Poke them with sticks and yell
> "cripple, dummy, or retard." That's okay with you, huh? We are all
> entitled to our opinions. You have your opinion and I have mine.
*sigh*
I guess this proves beyond a doubt that your skills in understanding
other people and what they say are seriously lacking. Go on with
your life. There are lots of windmills to fight.
Jon R.
Jared Head
Jon R. (Jon.R...@nor.uib.noXXX) wrote:
: Yes, I know. We have a minister of environmental issues who's a
: cripple. Only in Europe, eh?
Well, and in the states too, as has already been pointed out.
DavidEvan
>Yes, I know. We have a minister of environmental issues who's a
>: cripple. Only in Europe, eh?
Here in the United States (the only place I can speak for because I have never
had the pleasures of visiting outside my country) but we are striving-maybe
going overboard some might say-to be politically correct. If word leaked out
that you said "a cripple" you may find yourself keelhauled:). But to me, you
said 'cripple' in a way to me that wasn't the least offensive-just descriptive
of whom you're talking about; you weren't putting anybody down IMO. However,
when someone is hinted to be "not quite up to par" and should be found unworthy
of noble positions due to a lack (which may be compensated for elsewhere, as
was Nick's case) which icertainly isnt their doing, then I think the claws come
out, which is what I got from the original post. Oh well-bygones.
David
~Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspire
-I think some people in togas are plotting against me~
Grrl from Gilead
Jon R. wrote:
>
> Grrl from Gilead wrote:
>>
> >Jon R. wrote
Now I write:
Okay, I'll go chase some windmills, uh oh, I can't find any windmills
here in America.
Let me find something to hit *you* with, something brown and sticky....
ah-hah here it is...a brown stick. Okay, Jon R. hold your arms out,
pretend you're a windmill......so I can hit you.
Did you feel that?....I sent a whack up side your head through
cyberspace. Did that feel good my "windmill friend"?
Actually there is no love loss with me for you. I'm sticking to my
convictions though. I have my opinions and you have yours and n'er
shall the two met on this subject.
But answer me this. Why Ton Cullen?
Grrl From Gilead
Point-of-aim/Point-of-impact
>The
>assailants in the book were displaying their own attitudes (spurred by
>their own backwards ignorance)with violence. Some people use words to
>hurt fellow human beings, some use violence.
>
>Grrl From Gilead
Is 'backwards ignorance' the same thing as 'intelligence'?
just wondering,
Azure
Jon R.
Grrl from Gilead wrote:
> Okay, I'll go chase some windmills, uh oh, I can't find any windmills
> here in America.
> Let me find something to hit *you* with, something brown and sticky....
>
> ah-hah here it is...a brown stick. Okay, Jon R. hold your arms out,
> pretend you're a windmill......so I can hit you.
>
> Did you feel that?....I sent a whack up side your head through
> cyberspace. Did that feel good my "windmill friend"?
Ooooh. Spanking!
Fighting windmills is something Don Quixote (sp?) does, by mistake.
It's commonly used as an expressJon that someone is fighting a
meaningless, constructed battle.
> Actually there is no love loss with me for you. I'm sticking to my
> convictions though. I have my opinions and you have yours and n'er
> shall the two met on this subject.
Actually, our opinions are pretty similar. You just don't seem to
understand it.
> But answer me this. Why Ton Cullen?
*sigh*
I agree with Nick, all the way. Fran, who I didn't like, was used
quite well in that scene. She basically held the view one could
expect from people, that Tom shouldn't be sent.
Jon R.