Source Theme on SiaSL... have a few questions
Helen & Bob
sta...@ntplx.net wrote:
> I'm doing a source theme on SiaSL (which I just completed). My thesis
> statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government, American
> culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
>
> What was Heinlein's religion?
>
IMHO, RAHs religion was Logic, Reason, and Self Reliance. At least, that's what
I have gotten in 40 years of reading and rereading everything I could get my
hands on that he wrote. As t whether or not he was a deist,I tend to doubt it,
but I am not sure of that as a fact.
Bob
sta...@ntplx.net
statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government, American
culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
What was Heinlein's religion?
Also, if anyone has some ideas that can help me that come from quotes
Heinlein made or quotes from SiaSL or Literary criticism on the above 4
topics in my three thesis statements please email them to me at
sta...@ntplx.net or post them as a reply here. I will be uploading my source
theme's rough draft when its finished and hopefully you guys can criticize or
give me some more ideas that I missed while reading SiaSL. I wish I had time
to read it again and look more closely into Heinlein's views towards
government, American culture, family life, and religion.
Thanks for you time and help
Matthew
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
KERRY SMITH
Calvinist religious background.
Helen & Bob wrote in message <3695AA99...@ix.netcom.com>...
>
>
>sta...@ntplx.net wrote:
>
>> I'm doing a source theme on SiaSL (which I just completed). My thesis
>> statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government,
American
>> culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
>>
>> What was Heinlein's religion?
>>
>
Randy
<chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>sta...@ntplx.net wrote:
>
>> I'm doing a source theme on SiaSL (which I just completed). My thesis
>> statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government, American
>> culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
>>
>> What was Heinlein's religion?
>>
>
>IMHO, RAHs religion was Logic, Reason, and Self Reliance. At least, that's what
>I have gotten in 40 years of reading and rereading everything I could get my
>hands on that he wrote. As t whether or not he was a deist,I tend to doubt it,
>but I am not sure of that as a fact.
>Bob
Bullshit. RAH"S religion was Methodist. Period.
***************
Randy
Cryonics: Gateway to the Future?
http://www.mindspring.com/~cryon/cryonics/cryopage1.html
labert
>I'm doing a source theme on SiaSL (which I just completed). My thesis
>statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government, American
>culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
>
presume from what I've read that you're not in the American scholastic
system, so please identify the kind of paper you're writing.
2) As for the reason why my head exploded, as a writing teacher I
constantly deal with students who believe that a subject is a thesis
statement. A thesis statement must make some statement about the subject.
A thesis statement has two components, the subject and the author's attitude
about that subject. You've onl indicated your subject, and it's so broad
that you'll need a book to treat all those subjects in any meaningful
detail.
>What was Heinlein's religion?
He had no religion per se. Don't be misled by other respondents who tell
you what religion he was raised in and around. He most certainly did not
adhere to it as an adult. Art's write, if his life was guided by a set of
rules more so thanb his own conscience and independant evaluation of the
world, it was reason and logic.
>Also, if anyone has some ideas that can help me that come from quotes
>Heinlein made or quotes from SiaSL or Literary criticism on the above 4
>topics in my three thesis statements please email them to me at
>sta...@ntplx.net or post them as a reply here. I will be uploading my
source
>theme's rough draft when its finished and hopefully you guys can criticize
or
>give me some more ideas that I missed while reading SiaSL.
You will almost certainly be bombarded by criticism of content (useful and
spiteful) on this ng. If I see your draft, I'll comment on your writing if
you'd like, and on content as well, and you can email me with questions, tho
I'll need to know more about your situation and assignment first.
I wish I had time
>to read it again and look more closely into Heinlein's views towards
>government, American culture, family life, and religion.
>
>Thanks for you time and help
>Matthew
>
labert
"A zygote is a gamete's way of producing more gametes.
This may be the purpose of the universe."
The Senior
remove spam to email
labert
>Bullshit. RAH"S religion was Methodist. Period.
>
>***************
>Randy
What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend to
argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
support such an assertion, if so?
Helen & Bob
labert wrote:
> Randy wrote in message <3696105...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
> >Bullshit. RAH"S religion was Methodist. Period.
> >
> >***************
> >Randy
>
> What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend to
> argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
> support such an assertion, if so?
>
> labert
>
Labert, if you are not aware, Randy of the corpsicles is the master troller.
He comes in from time to time, makes a few casts, and is delighted if he gets
a bite. Most of us do not acknowledge his existence, at least, in this
continuum.
Bob
Pixelmeow
Then there's the fact that he never, ever, *ever*, backs up anything whatsoever
with fact. Just opinion. He reads something, gives it a little twist through
his opinion base, and comes out with a "RAH was:" based on his twisting. Then
he pukes it out into this group, hoping someone will jump on him for it. What
an absolute idiot!
--
~teresa~
^..^ Thou shalt remember the Eleventh Commandment and keep it Wholly. ^..^
Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein
Eat the .cat.nip to email...
"Blert!"
Ogden Johnson III
: sta...@ntplx.net wrote in message <773nau$tgf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
: >I'm doing a source theme on SiaSL (which I just completed). My thesis
: >statement is going to be basically Heinlein's views on government, American
: >culture, family life, and religion in SiaSL. I have a question:
: 2) As for the reason why my head exploded, as a writing teacher I
: constantly deal with students who believe that a subject is a thesis
: statement. A thesis statement must make some statement about the subject.
: A thesis statement has two components, the subject and the author's attitude
: about that subject. You've onl indicated your subject, and it's so broad
: that you'll need a book to treat all those subjects in any meaningful
: detail.
I started last night to respond, going around robin's barn in saying what
you have put much more concisely here. Indeed, were I this student trying
to address RAH's view on the four broad topics, rather than those implied
in the words of the characters in SiaSL, it would be only after a careful
reread of all of written work of his, and 'criticisms' of such, that I
could lay my hands on. And then, I would end up with a book, indeed, and
one that would, in the end, only contain what I thought were his views.
This young student, it would appear, has set a difficult, if not
impossible task, for him/herself.
OJ III
[Master's thesis? Doctoral dissertation? Anyone? Or does someone
already have a PhD in Heinlein?]
Ogden Johnson III
: Randy wrote in message <3696105...@news.mindspring.com>...
:
: >Bullshit. RAH"S religion was Methodist. Period.
: >
: >***************
: >Randy
: What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend to
: argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
: support such an assertion, if so?
:
: labert
Oh, you haven't met our 'Cryonics Randy' [to keep him separate from the
good Randy], have you? Might I suggest you look up some of his previous
pronouncements in a.f.h on dejanews, and the attendent threads? He first
burst upon the scene with an early claim that RAH was a 'superstitious old
scut' [in Cryonics Randyspeak, superstitious = religious], since RAH
declined to avail himself of a free offer for cryonic preservation, and
chose to be cremated instead. I *knew* he would show up as soon as I saw
the question in the original post.
OJ III
labert
>Bob wrote:
>
>>labert wrote:
snips
>>>Then there's the fact that he never, ever, *ever*, backs up anything
whatsoever
>with fact. Just opinion. He reads something, gives it a little twist
through
>his opinion base, and comes out with a "RAH was:" based on his twisting.
Then
>he pukes it out into this group, hoping someone will jump on him for it.
What
>an absolute idiot!
>
>--
>~teresa~
>
I'm ashamed to have been 'gotten'. Ah well, mistakes are for learning from.
labert
>> >>>
>> What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend
to
>> argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
>> support such an assertion, if so?
>>
>> labert
>>
>
troller.
>He comes in from time to time, makes a few casts, and is delighted if he
gets
>a bite. Most of us do not acknowledge his existence, at least, in this
>continuum.
>Bob
I grok, thanx Bob, I'll stay safely hidden amonst the reeds next time,
(unless he really needs a verbal smack).
I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
better than to respond to any of them. In hindsight, anyone here who
thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth the
time.
ddavitt
> Should've known
> better than to respond to any of them. In hindsight, anyone here who
> thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth the
> time.
>
> labert
>
>
To be fair to Randy (grits teeth and ploughs gamely on) it may be significant to
Heinlein's later opinions to consider the religion he was brought up with. Which
was Methodist, I think. If it wasn't someone will tell me!
I know that my rejected Catholic upbringing affected me. It may have no further
influence on my life now but it pushed me in a certain direction in the early,
formative years and who knows what I would have been like with a Protestant or
agnostic background.
That said, I am only posting this to help the guy writing the essay; Randy is
just stirring it again. And he knows it.
Jane
Randy
wrote:
>Helen & Bob wrote in message <36962433...@ix.netcom.com>...
>>
>>
>>labert wrote:
>>
>>> Randy wrote in message <3696105...@news.mindspring.com>...
>>>snip
>>> >>>
>>> What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend
>to
>>> argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
>>> support such an assertion, if so?
He was born, he lived as a methodist, and he died as a methodist.
>>Labert, if you are not aware, Randy of the corpsicles is the master
>troller.
They have their own definition of "troll."
>
>I grok, thanx Bob, I'll stay safely hidden amonst the reeds next time,
>(unless he really needs a verbal smack).
OK, let's party......
>
>I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
>responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
>better than to respond to any of them. In hindsight, anyone here who
>thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth the
>time.
Oh, really. Well, now, I guess I am just a li'l ol' troll for actually
posting evidence from actual publications to back up what I say, but
here's a direct quote from Heinlein himself:
Here's an exact quote from a bit of RAH NONFICTION
from his introduction to Theodore Sturgeon's _Godbody_:
"Early this century, before World War I, I was taught in Sunday school
that Jesus loves us, you and me and everyone, saint and sinner alike.
Then the Kaiser raped poor innocent Belgium, and never again did the
world seem sweet and warm and safe. Today I cannot promise you that
Jesus loves you, but I can assure you that Ted Sturgeon loves you ...
did love you and does today -- 'does,' present tense, because what I
still hold of my childhood faith includes a conviction that Ted did
not cease to be when his worn-out body stopped breathing. It may be
that villains die utterly. But not saints."
***************
Randy
Cryonics: Gateway to the Future?
http://www.mindspring.com/~cryon/cryonics/cryopage1.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>labert
>
>"A zygote is a gamete's way of producing more gametes.
>This may be the purpose of the universe."
>The Senior
>remove spam to email
>
>
***************
labert
>>labert wrote:
>
>>Pixelmeow wrote in message
<19990108113246...@ng-fv1.aol.com>...
>>>Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>>labert wrote:
>>snips
>>
from.
>>
>>labert
>
names
>he may not have recognized, and let fly with the bait. Not to worry, place
>your vote as to whether Jim should shred him again or not, in my other
post,
>and we'll see what happens... :)
>--
>~teresa~
Who exactly is Jim? And anyway, I tend not to shred the foolish, they're
not worth my time, or anyone else's. Sometimes I'd like to . . . maybe
fantasize a bit . . . nah, I'm a pacifist in general (there's an opening if
I ever saw one).
labert
Trefor Thomas
<chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>Labert, if you are not aware, Randy of the corpsicles is the master troller.
>He comes in from time to time, makes a few casts, and is delighted if he gets
>a bite. Most of us do not acknowledge his existence, at least, in this
>continuum.
I put him in the killfile awhile ago. I don't like dropping people in
there (as opposed to commercial types) but so much of his posting was
advertising for freezing that I figured, why not!
Trefor Thomas
To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated.
Pixelmeow
>On Fri, 8 Jan 1999 15:42:51 -0500, "labert" <laber...@fast.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Helen & Bob wrote in message <36962433...@ix.netcom.com>...
>>>
>>>
>>>labert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Randy wrote in message <3696105...@news.mindspring.com>...
>>>>snip
>>>> >>>
>>>> What do you mean by "RAH's religion was. . . "? Do you actually intend
>>to
>>>> argue that he had belief in the methodist religion? Can you possibly
>>>> support such an assertion, if so?
>
>He was born, he lived as a methodist, and he died as a methodist.
>
>
>
>
>>>Labert, if you are not aware, Randy of the corpsicles is the master
>>troller.
>
>They have their own definition of "troll."
>
>
>>
>>I grok, thanx Bob, I'll stay safely hidden amonst the reeds next time,
>>(unless he really needs a verbal smack).
>
>OK, let's party......
>
>>
>>I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
>>responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
>>better than to respond to any of them. In hindsight, anyone here who
>>thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth the
>>time.
>
>Oh, really. Well, now, I guess I am just a li'l ol' troll for actually
>posting evidence from actual publications to back up what I say, but
>here's a direct quote from Heinlein himself:
>
>
>Here's an exact quote from a bit of RAH NONFICTION
>from his introduction to Theodore Sturgeon's _Godbody_:
>
>"Early this century, before World War I, I was taught in Sunday school
>that Jesus loves us, you and me and everyone, saint and sinner alike.
>Then the Kaiser raped poor innocent Belgium, and never again did the
>world seem sweet and warm and safe. Today I cannot promise you that
>Jesus loves you, but I can assure you that Ted Sturgeon loves you ...
>did love you and does today -- 'does,' present tense, because what I
>still hold of my childhood faith includes a conviction that Ted did
>not cease to be when his worn-out body stopped breathing. It may be
>that villains die utterly. But not saints."
Yes, and I believe Nuke thwapped the hell out of you for putting your spin on
something and presenting it as proof of something that no one at all has proof
of. Remember? Then, there's the fact that the above quote (which you oh so
kindly spammed our group with, and seem to have snipped from your own copy)
says absolutely nothing about RAH's beliefs. Or shall I sic Jim on you again?
Hmmm? Oh, Pet... Dumbass is trying to stir the compost with someone else...
I know I asked you not to, but I may have to change my mind, since he's being
such an absolute pain in the group's collective hind end... What do you all
think? Another can of whup-ass for crybaby, hand delivered by Jim? With John
as second? And all the rest of us where we see fit? <slowly ejects claws and
stretches> Or shall we just killfile the whole thing?
Pixelmeow
>Pixelmeow wrote in message <19990108113246...@ng-fv1.aol.com>...
>>Bob wrote:
>>
>>>labert wrote:
>snips
>
>>>>Then there's the fact that he never, ever, *ever*, backs up anything
>whatsoever
>>with fact. Just opinion. He reads something, gives it a little twist
>through
>>his opinion base, and comes out with a "RAH was:" based on his twisting.
>Then
>>he pukes it out into this group, hoping someone will jump on him for it.
>What
>>an absolute idiot!
>>
>>--
>>~teresa~
>>
>
>I'm ashamed to have been 'gotten'. Ah well, mistakes are for learning from.
>
>labert
Oh, don't be! He waited long enough for there to be a few people whose names
he may not have recognized, and let fly with the bait. Not to worry, place
your vote as to whether Jim should shred him again or not, in my other post,
and we'll see what happens... :)
Ogden Johnson III
: Who exactly is Jim? And anyway, I tend not to shred the foolish, they're
: not worth my time, or anyone else's. Sometimes I'd like to . . . maybe
: fantasize a bit . . . nah, I'm a pacifist in general (there's an opening if
: I ever saw one).
Jim is Nuclear Waste. As to the pacifist comment; as a career Marine, I,
like most all of my fellow Marines, particularly those who have attended
wars at one time or another, am a determined pacifist who is also a
warrior. As with airline pilots, when the execrement hits the ventilating
device, we are the first ones to arrive.
OJ III
USMC Aviation Ops Pogue '61-'82
Helo Gunner x 3; SEA War Games
Helos, Harriers, and Ospreys Forever
Danxerox
labert wrote in message
>Helen & Bob wrote in message
<snip, misc. info on "the frozen one>
>I grok, thanx Bob, I'll stay safely hidden amonst the reeds next time,
>(unless he really needs a verbal smack).
>
>I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
>responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
>better than to respond to any of them. In hindsight, anyone here who
>thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth
the
>time.
Don't feel too bad, labert, "frigid randy" hooked me with "RAH was a
superstitious old scut" on his last pass. Just look for "Cryogenics" in the
headers or sig. to identify him.
Good to see you again, I was wondering where you'd gotten to.
Danxerox.
labert
Ogden Johnson III wrote in message ...
When will I learn not to ask stupid questions? Don't answer that ! If I'd
bothered to think a little harder, I'd likely have remebered that. This is
my punishment for not reading during my annual mental shutdown between
semesters.
That's the good kind of pacifist. Anyone who endangers me or my family will
discover which kind I am, and in some circumstances, not many, I could see
myself fighting for this furschluginner country to protect my family by
extension.
No offense to anyone, but at times I can be dismayed by the # of military
types here, as I am defintely not the military type, rarely interact with
such in the other world, and when I have, their attitudes are often
repugnant to me. Apparently, none of the military types I encountered
elsewhere had been influenced by RAH, as those here who've admitted that
particular shame <g> tend to be polite and useful. Jim sometimes doesn't
seem polite, but with enough reading one finds that he generally is, if
slightly confrontational. (Yes Jim, I'm hoping that you see this. <bg>
labert
"Of all the strange "crimes" that human beings have
legislated out of nothing, "blasphemy" is the most amazing
-- with "obscenity" and "indecent exposure" fighting it out
for second and third place."
The Senior
"Do you ever get the feeling
that the story's too damned real
and in the present tense?" _____ (fitb)
remove spam to email
labert
>
>Don't feel too bad, labert, "frigid randy" hooked me with "RAH was a
>superstitious old scut" on his last pass. Just look for "Cryogenics" in the
>headers or sig. to identify him.
>
>Good to see you again, I was wondering where you'd gotten to.
>
>Danxerox.
Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
pitifully).
I taught six classes last semester, and after reading about 150 assorted
often mediocre papers, and being forced to flunk the students who absolutely
refused to do more than a speck of work, (I hate grades and grading) between
Dec 18 and
New Years, I was left jerking and twitching uncontrollably on the floor
(which my wife quite enjoyed), totally unable to rise to the level of
sparkling
wit I feel is necessary to interact on this group. I couldn't even get up
the gumption to read without responding.
Instead, I spent my time re-reading Ender's Saga and complaining that my
wife and I can't recall to whom we lent Children of the Mind. Talk about
intellectuous interruptous!
Carpe Diem,
Pixelmeow
>Danxerox wrote in message <777gif$2ao$1...@remarQ.com>...
>>Good to see you again, I was wondering where you'd gotten to.
>Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
>pitifully).
Well, I noticed, too! There are a few others I'm missing, these days, too.
Where did Art go??? I get used to a certain group, then a few leave, a few
come back, a few leave, etc... Will everyone just *stay here*??? Except the
corpsicle, of course. ;)
labert
--
Pixelmeow wrote in message <19990109142328...@ng-fv1.aol.com>...
>>labert wrote:
>>Danxerox wrote in message <777gif$2ao$1...@remarQ.com>...
>
>>>Good to see you again, I was wondering where you'd gotten to.
>
>>Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
>>pitifully).
>
>Well, I noticed, too! There are a few others I'm missing, these days, too.
>Where did Art go??? I get used to a certain group, then a few leave, a few
>come back, a few leave, etc... Will everyone just *stay here*??? Except
the
>corpsicle, of course. ;)
>--
>~teresa~
Thanx for the thought, Pix, I'll try to hang around, tho in March when the
papers start coming in hot and heavy my participation will likely flag
again.
Btw, while I can't offer to be either minion or lackey, will you settle for
respected equal?
Kullervo Nurmi
> In one of the biographies that I have read, Heinlein came from a
>Calvinist religious background.
Are you claiming that his background makes the man?
BTW -- why can't you put your answers where they belong, by Usenet
convention: in the end, after what you quote?
>Helen & Bob wrote in message <3695AA99...@ix.netcom.com>...
>>
>>
>>sta...@ntplx.net wrote:
>>
>>> What was Heinlein's religion?
>>>
>>
>>IMHO, RAHs religion was Logic, Reason, and Self Reliance. At least, that's what
>>I have gotten in 40 years of reading and rereading everything I could get my
>>hands on that he wrote. As t whether or not he was a deist,I tend to doubt it,
>>but I am not sure of that as a fact.
IMO, that's much better than any attempts to put him in any particular
Xtian sect.
Kultsi
---
kullervo dot nurmi at pp dot inet dot fi
O Lord, protect me from those to whom You speak directly
-- Unknown
---
jani
labert wrote
Bob said
>>
>>Labert, if you are not aware, Randy of the corpsicles is the master
>troller.
>gets
>>a bite. Most of us do not acknowledge his existence, at least, in this
>>continuum.
>
>
>I grok, thanx Bob, I'll stay safely hidden amonst the reeds next time,
>(unless he really needs a verbal smack).
NW is i/c Randy-bashing, but I'm quite happy to deputise when necessary. <G>
Mostly we all leave him to it, as he runs out of steam (or dry ice?) after a
while..
>I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
>responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
>better than to respond to any of them.
At the moment, the only known Randincarnations are RandyS, our resident
cryo-evangelist, and RandyP, who *used* to be a troll, but is now an
occasional poster with admittedly forthright opinions, but no current
aliases.
In hindsight, anyone here who
>thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth
the
>time.
>
I don't see any problem with RAH being brought up as a Methodist: I expect
most people here were brought up as "something", whether they retained that
belief system later in life or not. It's just a biographical detail, after
all, which might be of interest if someone wanted to correlate, for
instance, Methodist principles with a particular social theme prevalent in
RAH's work. I think that was probably the area which the student who
originally asked the question was trying to explore.
Jani
jani
labert wrote
>Pixelmeow wrote
>snips
>
>>>>Then there's the fact that he never, ever, *ever*, backs up anything
>whatsoever
>>with fact. Just opinion. He reads something, gives it a little twist
>through
>>his opinion base, and comes out with a "RAH was:" based on his twisting.
>Then
>>he pukes it out into this group, hoping someone will jump on him for it.
>What
>>an absolute idiot!
>I'm ashamed to have been 'gotten'. Ah well, mistakes are for learning
from.
I read this post in the wrong order, and thought at first you were having a
go at the poor student who asked for help with his essay! Just as well I
read on a bit further <G>
Jani
labert
<915923064.27483.3...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
>labert wrote
snip
>> In hindsight, anyone here who
>>thought RAH "had" religion, honestly or sarcastically, wouldn't be worth
>the
>>time.
>>
>
>I don't see any problem with RAH being brought up as a Methodist: I expect
>most people here were brought up as "something", whether they retained that
>belief system later in life or not. It's just a biographical detail, after
>all, which might be of interest if someone wanted to correlate, for
>instance, Methodist principles with a particular social theme prevalent in
>RAH's work. I think that was probably the area which the student who
>originally asked the question was trying to explore.
>
>Jani
This goes back to the original question, 'what was H's religion' .
Regardless of what religion he was raised in, this question seems to refer
to him in his life as the author of the works we admire. Therefore the
proper answer to the question, so far as I know, CANNOT be 'methodist.'
Exploring the presence of themes in his works which may have been drawn from
his birth religion is distinct, IMO, from exploring 'his' religion. That
difference was all that I meant to address originally, however foolish I
might have been to indulge _ _ _ _ _.
I attended a Methodist church in my youth, and was even Confirmed a member,
much to my shame, but if asked what my religion is, I reply that I am
rational, not that I am a Methodist.
labert
<915923063.27483.2...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
>labert wrote
>>snips
>>I'm ashamed to have been 'gotten'. Ah well, mistakes are for learning
>from.
>
>I read this post in the wrong order, and thought at first you were having
a
>go at the poor student who asked for help with his essay! Just as well I
>read on a bit further <G>
>
>Jani
I would hate for anyone to think that, for pete's sake I'm a writing
teacher, and posted a rather long set of suggestions for the student. Glad
to clear this up.
labert
>
>Pixelmeow wrote in message
<19990109142328...@ng-fv1.aol.com>...
>>>labert wrote:
>>
>>>Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
>>>pitifully).
>>
>>Well, I noticed, too! There are a few others I'm missing, these days,
too.
>>Where did Art go??? I get used to a certain group, then a few leave, a
few
>>come back, a few leave, etc... Will everyone just *stay here*??? Except
>the
>>corpsicle, of course. ;)
>>--
>>~teresa~
Hate to be morbid, but I just had a horrid thought. Given the nature of
this little community, one of us could be killed in a car accident or
something equally nasty, disappear, and we'd never hear (perhaps not in all
cases). Let's hope it doesn't happen, and think good thoughts of those we
haven't heard from in awhile. (But don't get the idea that I'm encouraging
anyone to pray for anyone. <somber g>)
Randy J. Jost
> labert wrote in message
> >I've seen so many Randy s float in and out, most of whom weren't worth
> >responding to, that I wasn't sure this was one of them. Should've known
> >better than to respond to any of them.
>
> Don't feel too bad, labert, "frigid randy" hooked me with "RAH was a
> superstitious old scut" on his last pass. Just look for "Cryogenics" in the
> headers or sig. to identify him.
Please be aware that there is at least one warm-blooded Randy floating around
here, who is here for the intelligent conversation and discussion about RAH,
and is not interested in trolls, flames or cryogenics. ;-) Imagine my
surprise when I first started checking this newsgroup and found out that "I"
was already here. Anyway, I believe that you will be able to discern my posts
from the other Randy's posts.
Please check the signature and or tone to distinguish between the warm Randy
and the cold Randy. Plus, I always provide a complete signature.
Best regards,
Randy (now you're getting warmer!)
--
Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
rj...@zianet.com
Danxerox
labert wrote in message <778qfm$3no$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>labert wrote in message <778fr9$dpc$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>>
>>Pixelmeow wrote in message
><19990109142328...@ng-fv1.aol.com>...
>>>>labert wrote:
>>>
>>>>Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
>>>>pitifully).
>>>
>>>Well, I noticed, too! There are a few others I'm missing, these days,
>too.
>>>Where did Art go??? I get used to a certain group, then a few leave, a
>few
>>>come back, a few leave, etc... Will everyone just *stay here*??? Except
>>the
>>>corpsicle, of course. ;)
>>>--
>>>~teresa~
>
>Hate to be morbid, but I just had a horrid thought. Given the nature of
>this little community, one of us could be killed in a car accident or
>something equally nasty, disappear, and we'd never hear (perhaps not in all
>cases). Let's hope it doesn't happen, and think good thoughts of those we
>haven't heard from in awhile. (But don't get the idea that I'm encouraging
>anyone to pray for anyone. <somber g>)
Interesting thought, and not just for NGs either. I have a couple of people
that I correspond with in email, and were something to happen to me/my
family, they wouldn't necessarily be able to find out what happened either.
I'm thinking that I will have to add another page to my "wrapping up" file,
telling whoever to post/email those who would want to know. Heck, I could
even write my own eulogy and obit, cool!
Danxerox.
Pixelmeow
>Thanx for the thought, Pix, I'll try to hang around, tho in March when the
>papers start coming in hot and heavy my participation will likely flag
>again.
I have the same problem, except I am the student. Midterms, programs, maybe a
paper or two...
>Btw, while I can't offer to be either minion or lackey, will you settle for
>respected equal?
Somehow, I didn't expect you to become a minion... ;-) And since we are all
equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
Pixelmeow
>Hate to be morbid, but I just had a horrid thought. Given the nature of
>this little community, one of us could be killed in a car accident or
>something equally nasty, disappear, and we'd never hear (perhaps not in all
>cases). Let's hope it doesn't happen, and think good thoughts of those we
>haven't heard from in awhile. (But don't get the idea that I'm encouraging
>anyone to pray for anyone. <somber g>)
You know, I've had the same thoughts on occasion. Unsettling...
Ogden Johnson III
: Hate to be morbid, but I just had a horrid thought. Given the nature of
: this little community, one of us could be killed in a car accident or
: something equally nasty, disappear, and we'd never hear (perhaps not in all
: cases). Let's hope it doesn't happen, and think good thoughts of those we
: haven't heard from in awhile. (But don't get the idea that I'm encouraging
: anyone to pray for anyone. <somber g>)
It has happened before on other newsgroups I frequent. Following my
heart attack/stroke [which, however mild, tends to redirect your attention
and priorities] and return to regular Usenet posting, I set up a list of
my regular newsgroups [which I update as necessary] and set it up with my
wife and my lawyer [well, a friend who is a lawyer and did my will] for an
appropriate post. Ever the netiquette fan, my hope is for one round of a
'gee what a shame/glad we're rid of that ***' thread versus endless 'what
ever happened to' ones confusing already confused newbies.
OJ III
Android
pixe...@aol.com.cat.nip (Pixelmeow) to write:
>since we are all
>equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
Oh goody! I wanna be an astronaut!!
D'android
"Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit, I"
-- Gilmour, Moore, Ezrin, Carin
Obliterate "XspamX" for email.
Danxerox
Android wrote in message <36983f42....@news.golden.net>...
>On 10 Jan 1999 01:16:17 GMT, a Grumble from the Grave caused
>pixe...@aol.com.cat.nip (Pixelmeow) to write:
>
>>since we are all
>>equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
>
>Oh goody! I wanna be an astronaut!!
>
>D'android
I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
Danxerox.
Nuclear Waste
labert wrote in message <776ien$bei$1...@news1.fast.net>...
|Who exactly is Jim? And anyway, I tend not to shred the foolish,
they're
|not worth my time, or anyone else's. Sometimes I'd like to . . . maybe
|fantasize a bit . . . nah, I'm a pacifist in general (there's an
opening if
|I ever saw one).
I would be Jim on most days and to most people. Pleased to meetcha. :)
Randy is not foolish, he is petty, vindictive and childish, but NOT
foolish. A pacifist? No worries, that is why Pix keeps me around, I
also play a mean game of chess. :)
NW
(Who is wondering how a Pacifist gets to be a general...)
Nuclear Waste
labert wrote in message <777o56$mr2$1...@news1.fast.net>...
Snip
|That's the good kind of pacifist. Anyone who endangers me or my family
will
|discover which kind I am, and in some circumstances, not many, I could
see
|myself fighting for this furschluginner country to protect my family by
|extension.
|
|No offense to anyone, but at times I can be dismayed by the # of
military
|types here, as I am defintely not the military type, rarely interact
with
|such in the other world, and when I have, their attitudes are often
|repugnant to me. Apparently, none of the military types I encountered
|elsewhere had been influenced by RAH, as those here who've admitted
that
|particular shame <g> tend to be polite and useful. Jim sometimes
doesn't
|seem polite, but with enough reading one finds that he generally is, if
|slightly confrontational. (Yes Jim, I'm hoping that you see this. <bg>
ROTFLMAO. <G> Well, I did. Slightly confrontational? Like hell!
There is nothing slight about my style. :) However, you will notice
that do abide by the same rules that I expect others to follow.
Something that some of the folks don't bother with.
NW
(Who even argues this way IRL. :))
Joe, if you are reading, (And I know you are still lurking, so just
delurk and get it over with) go ahead and let loose with one of your
own pithy observations. You have seen more of my arguments than anyone.
Nuclear Waste
|
|>>Good to see you again, I was wondering where you'd gotten to.
|
|>pitifully).
|
|Well, I noticed, too! There are a few others I'm missing, these days,
too.
|Where did Art go??? I get used to a certain group, then a few leave, a
few
|come back, a few leave, etc... Will everyone just *stay here*???
Except the
|corpsicle, of course. ;)
<BG> I did not know you liked Niven!!'
NW
Nuclear Waste
Danxerox wrote in message <779qg7$gbd$1...@remarQ.com>...
Gee, Dan, the thought of you in women's clothing is unsettling, to say
the least...
NW
Phebe
>here for the intelligent conversation and discussion about RAH,
> and is not interested in trolls, flames or cryogenics.
Intelligent conversation sans flames would certainly be nice. I'll keep
in mind you are warm Randy as opposed to cryogenic Randy -- that's
memorable!
Phebe
Phebe
> I attended a Methodist church in my youth, and was even Confirmed a member,
> much to my shame, but if asked what my religion is, I reply that I am
> rational, not that I am a Methodist.
I always say I'm an ethnic Protestant, because I think that is actually
what people are asking: what ethnic group do you belong to. As for shame
of being confirmed as young people are, why, I wonder? Methodism made
for a good standard Protestant bible education, I thought, and there is
a lot to be said for having that to quote from and understand quotes
from later.
>
Phebe
labert
Silly me for thinking I'd had an original thought, as other responses have
also shown. :-)
--
labert
labert
>I'm a pacifist in general (there's an
>opening if I ever saw one).
>
>I would be Jim on most days and to most people. Pleased to meetcha. :)
>Randy is not foolish, he is petty, vindictive and childish, but NOT
>foolish. A pacifist? No worries, that is why Pix keeps me around, I
>also play a mean game of chess. :)
>
>NW
>
>(Who is wondering how a Pacifist gets to be a general...)
Sorry Jim, I knew that before my sabbatical from the group, but all else
tends to fade at semester's end.
No, corpsicle's not foolish, I sometimes even agree with the ideas in his
posts, if not the delivery.
As for being a pacifist general, that's easy;
Theory A: You're military, you know how screwy it can be, you never know.
Theory B: Since I rule the universe, I can appoint myself anything I like,
and I wish all my subjects would quit questioning me, dammit.
As for the overriding reason for this post, I theorize that many sloe
thingies must have been consumed lately, as you've been cracking me up more
than I recall you doing in the past, or are you as happy as I am that the
whole witchhunt is blowing up in the Republican's faces? <leading g>
On a side note, I'm beginning to feel like I don't fit in here. I'm not
exactly a gourmet, tho I enjoy a good steak, I'm not military, I'm
partially a socialist, and I don't share this fascination with alcohol that
ya'll seem to have. Should I feel the need to indulge in recreational
drugs, I recall a few that were a lot more fun and a lot more useful than
alcohol, without the hangover. Tho come to think of it, its rather annoying
that the gov will let you indulge your choice, but not let me choose mine.
labert
--
Nuclear Waste
labert wrote in message <77asu7$jkv$5...@news1.fast.net>...
|Sorry Jim, I knew that before my sabbatical from the group, but all
else
|tends to fade at semester's end.
|No, corpsicle's not foolish, I sometimes even agree with the ideas in
his
|posts, if not the delivery.
In general that is my problem with Randy. He is intolerant, and
abrasive. (Ouch, that sounds like me!)
|
|As for being a pacifist general, that's easy;
|
|Theory A: You're military, you know how screwy it can be, you never
know.
|
|Theory B: Since I rule the universe, I can appoint myself anything I
like,
|and I wish all my subjects would quit questioning me, dammit.
Aye-aye! *snaps a salute*
|As for the overriding reason for this post, I theorize that many sloe
|thingies must have been consumed lately, as you've been cracking me up
more
|than I recall you doing in the past, or are you as happy as I am that
the
|whole witchhunt is blowing up in the Republican's faces? <leading g>
I am actually enjoying everyone's discomfiture. I say we impeach
everyone! Notice no stupid laws have spewed forth in many days! I
actually did drink to many the other night, but since I do not drink
often, it is easy for me to reach my limit. :)
|On a side note, I'm beginning to feel like I don't fit in here. I'm
not
|exactly a gourmet, tho I enjoy a good steak, I'm not military, I'm
|partially a socialist,
So you are an individual with interesting viewpoints, and something of
substance to add? How does this preclude you from participating?
and I don't share this fascination with alcohol that
|ya'll seem to have.
LOL My fascination is with single malt scotch, a bottle of which
normally lasts from Christmas to Christmas. Other drinks are usually
serendipitous results of socialization.
Should I feel the need to indulge in recreational
|drugs, I recall a few that were a lot more fun and a lot more useful
than
|alcohol, without the hangover.
I do not get hangovers aas a rule. :) Sick, but there it is. (No
seasickness either.) For otherr drugs the VA gives me anything I could
possibly want. See, being a veteran has more benefits than you thought!
Tho come to think of it, its rather annoying
|that the gov will let you indulge your choice, but not let me choose
mine.
LOL
jani
labert wrote
>
>Hate to be morbid, but I just had a horrid thought. Given the nature of
>this little community, one of us could be killed in a car accident or
>something equally nasty, disappear, and we'd never hear (perhaps not in all
>cases). Let's hope it doesn't happen, and think good thoughts of those we
>haven't heard from in awhile. (But don't get the idea that I'm encouraging
>anyone to pray for anyone. <somber g>)
I reckon that with all the subsets of people on email, if one of us *did*
vanish under unpleasant circumstances there'd be some information link back
to afh - for instance, if someone finally succumbed to their instincts and
shoved me off a cliff, Stephen would email Jim or Pixel or somebody to let
them know....I hope you'd all have a damn good party in my honour! <G>
Jani
jani
Danxerox wrote
>
>Android wrote
Pixel wrote
>>
>>>since we are all
>>>equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
>>
>>Oh goody! I wanna be an astronaut!!
>>
>>D'android
>
>
>I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
>
Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
Jani
jani
Randy J. Jost wrote >>
> Please be aware that there is at least one warm-blooded Randy floating
around
>here, who is here for the intelligent conversation and discussion about
RAH,
>and is not interested in trolls, flames or cryogenics. ;-) Imagine my
>surprise when I first started checking this newsgroup and found out that
"I"
>was already here. Anyway, I believe that you will be able to discern my
posts
>from the other Randy's posts.
>
>Please check the signature and or tone to distinguish between the warm
Randy
>and the cold Randy. Plus, I always provide a complete signature.
>
>Best regards,
>Randy (now you're getting warmer!)
>--
>Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
Welcome, Randy! Nice to meet you, please state your preferences regarding
beer and/ or whisky -
(I'm going to rephrase that in future: I sound like the Doctor in
Voyager -"Please state the nature of the alcoholic emergency ....")
- and I will ensure the bar is stocked with your favourite. Items on the
discussion menu are as varied as always, with musical interludes appearing
unexpectedly on several threads. Please take care when passing Mr Atkinson's
cage; the Libertarian thrown to him for lunch evidently did not agree with
him. :-)
Jani
John M. Atkinson
wrote:
>It has happened before on other newsgroups I frequent. Following my
>heart attack/stroke [which, however mild, tends to redirect your attention
>and priorities] and return to regular Usenet posting, I set up a list of
>my regular newsgroups [which I update as necessary] and set it up with my
Simplicity itself for me--Jason and I have about a 50% commonality in
newsgroups, and I know where to find his copy of Agent anyway for the
complete list. And vice versa.
John M. Atkinson
'erols' instead of spamblock
"Ultimately, most problems can be solved by applying a large
brick to the correct skull. Difficulties arise when you don't
have a brick or can't find the right skull. The devil is always
in the details."
--Marcus Cole
John M. Atkinson
wrote:
>I always say I'm an ethnic Protestant, because I think that is actually
>what people are asking: what ethnic group do you belong to. As for shame
>of being confirmed as young people are, why, I wonder? Methodism made
>for a good standard Protestant bible education, I thought, and there is
>a lot to be said for having that to quote from and understand quotes
>from later.
Heh. My usual response is "Well, I was born a Southern Baptist."
If pressed for further details, I admit to a general philisophical
Neo-Chalcedonian standpoint, without actually belonging to any
particular church.
I also feel that my religion is primarily between myself and my God.
I don't discuss it often, don't bring it into arguments, and it
doesn't bother me when people make stupid statements--any statement
containing a phrase semantically equivelant to "All Christians" is
going to be utterly meaningless. I don't feel a need to defend either
my God, my beliefs, nor my rationality for having those beliefs. If
it makes anyone feel better for trashing them, have fun. All I feel
for those is pity--it must be sad, having such little faith in your
philisophical underpinnings that you need to snipe at other's
philosophies. This isn't like science, or law, or history, where
there is a right and a wrong. This isn't even politics, where there
are irrational ideas and rational ideas. There is just what I
believe, and what you believe, and if the beliefs differ, all that
means is that we are different people.
Now, an engaging theological. . . discussion, such as I have had with
a Catholic I met on a mailing list, that's a different subject. But
that belongs on e-mail, not in public.
Randy J. Jost
> No offense to anyone, but at times I can be dismayed by the # of military
> types here, as I am defintely not the military type, rarely interact with
> such in the other world, and when I have, their attitudes are often
> repugnant to me. Apparently, none of the military types I encountered
> elsewhere had been influenced by RAH, as those here who've admitted that
> particular shame <g> tend to be polite and useful.
labert,
You probably would have been pretty dismayed by my family then. My dad was is
in the Marines and my mom was in the Navy. My dad's brother was in the Marines
also, and my dad's sister is married to a 30 year Navy man. My aunt's boys were
in the Air Force and the National Guard. My brother was in the Army and met his
wife there. My sister was also married to an Army man, until his early,
untimely death. I spent two years at West Point and have spent 7 years on
active duty and 9 years in the Air Force reserve, recently promoted to Lt. Col.
Still, I understand your comment about "military types." It was one of the
reasons I decided to leave West Point and ended up in the Air Force instead.
However, my mother started me on science fiction at an early age and Heinlein
was one of my early favorites. Indeed, I think in retrospect, he influenced the
direction of my life significantly. Hmmmm....sounds like the topic of another
thread.
But, the military is not for everyone. After all, the only reason for the
military is to keep our way of life secure for poets, artists and writers. I
think Asimov wrote some very pointed, short stories about this very fact.
Still, they are indispensable to protecting our way of life as is an informed
electorate and a response government. Gee, why do I suddenly feel less sure
about things in the future? :-)
Best regards,
Randy
--
Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
Pixelmeow
>Randy J. Jost wrote >>
>
>
>> Please be aware that there is at least one warm-blooded Randy floating
>around
>>here, who is here for the intelligent conversation and discussion about
>RAH,
>>and is not interested in trolls, flames or cryogenics. ;-) Imagine my
>>surprise when I first started checking this newsgroup and found out that
>"I"
>>was already here. Anyway, I believe that you will be able to discern my
>posts
>>from the other Randy's posts.
>>
>>Please check the signature and or tone to distinguish between the warm
>Randy
>>and the cold Randy. Plus, I always provide a complete signature.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Randy (now you're getting warmer!)
>>--
>>Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
>
>
>Welcome, Randy! Nice to meet you, please state your preferences regarding
>beer and/ or whisky -
> (I'm going to rephrase that in future: I sound like the Doctor in
>Voyager -"Please state the nature of the alcoholic emergency ....")
> - and I will ensure the bar is stocked with your favourite. Items on the
>discussion menu are as varied as always, with musical interludes appearing
>unexpectedly on several threads. Please take care when passing Mr Atkinson's
>cage; the Libertarian thrown to him for lunch evidently did not agree with
>him. :-)
>
>Jani
ROTFLMAO! Is that what that mess is, over there on the floor???
heeheeheehee!!! Good to have you here, just ignore the corpsicle when he tries
to provoke. :-)
Pixelmeow
>Android wrote in message <36983f42....@news.golden.net>...
>>On 10 Jan 1999 01:16:17 GMT, a Grumble from the Grave caused
>>pixe...@aol.com.cat.nip (Pixelmeow) to write:
>>
>>>since we are all
>>>equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
>>
>>Oh goody! I wanna be an astronaut!!
>>
>>D'android
>
>
>I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
>
>Danxerox.
Do you wish to dress up in ladies' underwear, too???
Randy J. Jost
> Welcome, Randy! Nice to meet you, please state your preferences regarding
> beer and/ or whisky -
Sorry to say, I don't partake of the results of fermented grain or grape.
However, don't let me stop anyone else, which I am sure won't happen, anyway. I
am partial to Chocolate Milkshakes, and Diet Pepsi, however. ;-)
> - and I will ensure the bar is stocked with your favourite. Items on the
> discussion menu are as varied as always, with musical interludes appearing
> unexpectedly on several threads.
Well, music is one of the great loves of my life, as well as science fiction, so
I don't mind them a bit. Since my tastes are quite eclectic, most are
acceptable. Tend towards contemporary Jazz, classic rock, and classic "bach".
And I do like Pink Floyd too!
> Please take care when passing Mr Atkinson's
> cage; the Libertarian thrown to him for lunch evidently did not agree with
> him. :-)
Is there an AFH guide to "political labels that might mean different things to
different people, without a clear and concise definition of said labels"? ;-)
Then I'll know what label I should wear (besides JC Penney and LL Bean)
Best regards,
Randy J
--
Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
labert
>labert wrote:
>> I attended a Methodist church in my youth, and was even Confirmed a
member,
>> much to my shame, but if asked what my religion is, I reply that I am
>> rational, not that I am a Methodist.
>
>what people are asking: what ethnic group do you belong to. As for shame
>of being confirmed as young people are, why, I wonder? Methodism made
>for a good standard Protestant bible education, I thought, and there is
>a lot to be said for having that to quote from and understand quotes
>from later.
>>
The shame results from my not having spoken up earlier. At the time I was
beginning to see both the silliness and the danger in religion. If I'd
voiced my objections strongly enuf, my parents may not have expected me to
be confirmed. They'd already agreed that once confirmed, I could attend or
not as I chose. I haven't been back in a church since but for weddings and
a baptism once, none of which I approved of or enjoyed. The experience
grates on me.
True, what I learned of the Bible in those days is useful now, but all the
wasted time is a rough price to pay for it.
--
labert
labert
>|No, corpsicle's not foolish, I sometimes even agree with the ideas in
>his posts, if not the delivery.
>
>In general that is my problem with Randy. He is intolerant, and
>abrasive. (Ouch, that sounds like me!)
>
>|As for being a pacifist general, that's easy;
>|Theory B: Since I rule the universe, I can appoint myself anything I
>like, and I wish all my subjects would quit questioning me, dammit.
>
>Aye-aye! *snaps a salute*
The wife and I both guffawing!
>|As for the overriding reason for this post, I theorize that many sloe
>|thingies must have been consumed lately, as you've been cracking me up
>more
>|than I recall you doing in the past, or are you as happy as I am that
>the
>|whole witchhunt is blowing up in the Republican's faces? <leading g>
>
>I am actually enjoying everyone's discomfiture. I say we impeach
>everyone! Notice no stupid laws have spewed forth in many days!
An excellent point.
>I actually did drink to many the other night, but since I do not drink
>often, it is easy for me to reach my limit. :)
>
snip, and don't worry, none of those things will keep me from participating,
as those who are sick of me have probably noticed<g>.
> and I don't share this fascination with alcohol that
>|ya'll seem to have.
>
>LOL My fascination is with single malt scotch, a bottle of which
>normally lasts from Christmas to Christmas. Other drinks are usually
>serendipitous results of socialization.
Glad to hear it. I have a bottle of Jack Daniels, my very rare indulgence
of choice, that's nearly full despite having ben around for six years.
> Should I feel the need to indulge in recreational
>|drugs, I recall a few that were a lot more fun and a lot more useful
>than alcohol, without the hangover.
>
>I do not get hangovers aas a rule. :) Sick, but there it is. (No
>seasickness either.) For otherr drugs the VA gives me anything I could
>possibly want. See, being a veteran has more benefits than you thought!
Sure, gloat about all those things, why doncha.
labert
<916004962.8419.1...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
>>I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
>>
>>Danxerox.
>
>Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
>
>Jani
Dan, I'm shocked! But I'll claim she's spreading unfounded rumors, just for
appearances sake.
labert
--
labert
>: exactly a gourmet, tho I enjoy a good steak, I'm not military, I'm
that
>: ya'll seem to have. Should I feel the need to indulge in recreational
>
>Since Mya is equally enthusiastic about my doctors' strictures [cf my
>response to NW's 'brisket alternate' recipe] about alcohol, talking,
>fascinating or not, about it is my primary activity in that arena.
>Probably average one night a week at Murphy's, and that just to keep in
>touch there.
>
>No, don't worry, you fit in fine here. Always have.
>OJ III
While all the things I said about myself are true, I wasn't all that
concerned about not fitting in. Hell, I've read all the major novels at
least four times, some up to ten. That alone should qualify me. :-)
But thanks for the reassurance, and to others who said similar, it honestly
does mean something to me to be acknowledged by rah fans.
labert
Pixelmeow wrote in message <19990110211404...@ng-fx1.aol.com>...
>>labert wrote:
>
>>On a side note, I'm beginning to feel like I don't fit in here
snip
>
>Oh, please don't feel that you don't fit in! You have intelligent
discourse on
>this group, and are fun to talk to and to read, so I for one vote that you
>stay. Of course, since you are the leader of everything, what good does my
>vote do??? ;-)
>
>--
>~teresa~
LOL. As I said elswhere, that was somewhat tongue in cheek; I am starting
to feel somewhat less undereducated, unsophisticated, unread, generally
foolish, and altogether unworthy.
And as you point out, as ruler of the universe, I'll be rather difficult to
get rid of, see?
But you, after your birthday, I won't be speaking to, as I tried to e-mail
the other day, sniffle, and couldn't, sob, get thru your filter, waaaah!
Phebe
> If I'd
> voiced my objections strongly enuf, my parents may not have expected me to
> be confirmed. They'd already agreed that once confirmed, I could attend or
> not as I chose. The experience
> grates on me.
Yes, I quite see what you mean. That was illogical of them, really. If
they weren't going to make you go to church after, why not let you get
confirmed if and when you chose.
Phebe
Phebe
>...the only reason for the
> military is to keep our way of life secure for poets, artists and >writers.
C.S. Lewis said something like that, in one of his radio shows during
WWII ---- that the whole pointof fighting was a family sitting around
the table eating dinner. I've often thought of that. Very true, I think.
Phebe
Ogden Johnson III
John M. Atkinson
wrote:
>unexpectedly on several threads. Please take care when passing Mr Atkinson's
>cage; the Libertarian thrown to him for lunch evidently did not agree with
>him. :-)
Dear God In Heaven!
You CANNOT concieve how funny I find this statement. First, the
background.
I borrowed a copy of Jim Baen's New Destinies, Volume IX, Fall 1990.
In it is the very short story "Thus I Refute Kafka" by John J.
Ordover. In this story, a man is arguing with a roach. I can't quote
the whole thing (copywrite, it's short enough), but the roach is
arguing for a meaning and order to the Universe and the man is saying
that the universe is composed of meaningless chaotic patterns. The
roach says "Don't you feel the Universe has any rules at all?" and the
man says "Might makes right" and eats the roach. Then the man has
some questions about whether it was wrong to have destroyed another
intelligent being just to make a philisophical point. His roommate
notes his upset and asks if he has the flu that was going around.
"No," I answered, "I just ate something that disagreed with me."
Ogden Johnson III
: (I'm going to rephrase that in future: I sound like the Doctor in
: Voyager -"Please state the nature of the alcoholic emergency ....")
The situation of his cameo in ST/TNG-First Contact put me on the floor.
OJ III
Pixelmeow
>On a side note, I'm beginning to feel like I don't fit in here. I'm not
>exactly a gourmet, tho I enjoy a good steak, I'm not military, I'm
>partially a socialist, and I don't share this fascination with alcohol that
>ya'll seem to have. Should I feel the need to indulge in recreational
>drugs, I recall a few that were a lot more fun and a lot more useful than
>alcohol, without the hangover. Tho come to think of it, its rather annoying
>that the gov will let you indulge your choice, but not let me choose mine.
Oh, please don't feel that you don't fit in! You have intelligent discourse on
this group, and are fun to talk to and to read, so I for one vote that you
stay. Of course, since you are the leader of everything, what good does my
vote do??? ;-)
--
~teresa~
^..^ Thou shalt remember the Eleventh Commandment and keep it Wholly. ^..^
Danxerox
labert
>Good to be back. Glad SOMEbody missed me! (whimpering and pouting
pitifully).
<snip, all too common situation where 3D life interferes with the
*important* things>
I've had a few things happen on this end that really reduced my posting
time, it's amazing how irksome that is to me, especially considering how
short a time I've been online. I never considered the possibility that I
could become addicted to this so rapidly.
I guess, in the end, I have to put the blame all of the rest of you in AFH
for being such interesting and intelligent people that I can't seem to walk
past my 'puter without at least checking the messages, even if I don't have
time to post.
Danxerox.
Danxerox
Nuclear Waste wrote
>Danxerox wrote
>|Android wrote
>|>(Pixelmeow) wrote
>|>
>|>>since we are all
>|>>equals here, IMHO, you can be whatever you wanna be!
>|>
>|>Oh goody! I wanna be an astronaut!!
>|>
>
>
>the least...
I think the full beard would ruin the effect. ;-)
Danxerox.
Pixelmeow
>But you, after your birthday, I won't be speaking to, as I tried to e-mail
>the other day, sniffle, and couldn't, sob, get thru your filter, waaaah!
>
Well, If you'd asked, I would have included you in my list of accepted mailing
from addresses! Hmph! But I added you anyway, the address you use in this ng
without the word 'spam'. Serves you right. ;-P
Android
"jani" <ja...@sveiss.demon.co.uk> to write:
>Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
I'm guessing your question was for that other fella whose parents
stole my name, but what the hell...
What, pray tell, is wrong with a women's underwear thread? I'd bet
my "bottom" dollar that RAH enjoyed such discussions.
As a rule, I'm not too fussy about her "unmentionables"---not as long
as she's comfortable in them and they come off easily---but I really
do hate those cotton things that go up past the belly button. What
the hell _is_ that? A built-in apron, er sumpthin?
D'android
"Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit, I"
-- Gilmour, Moore, Ezrin, Carin
Obliterate "XspamX" for email.
Helen & Bob
> Last night, 1/10/99, at 2244 hours, I posted a happy Birthday message to Teresa,
> through this newsgroup. using a reply to group icon. As of 0849 hours 1/11/99,
> (all times PST), this posting has not appeared on the ng, at least, not on my
> screen.
I am of the impression that there is a lot of this.
Now what, troops??
Bob
Alexandre Pechtchanski
Strange... netcom.com is usually considered a good ISP. Maybe temporary
difficulties?
[ When replying, remove *'s from address ]
Alexandre Pechtchanski, Systems Manager, RUH, NY
labert
>>labert,
>
>You probably would have been pretty dismayed by my family then. My dad was
is in the Marines and my mom was in the Navy. My dad's brother was in the
Marines also, and my dad's sister is married to a 30 year Navy man. My
aunt's boys
were in the Air Force and the National Guard. My brother was in the Army
and
met his wife there. My sister was also married to an Army man, until his
early,
>untimely death. I spent two years at West Point and have spent 7 years on
>active duty and 9 years in the Air Force reserve, recently promoted to Lt.
Col.
Still, I understand your comment about "military types." It was one of the
>reasons I decided to leave West Point and ended up in the Air Force
instead. However, my mother started me on science fiction at an early age
and
Heinlein was one of my early favorites. Indeed, I think in retrospect, he
influenced the direction of my life significantly. Hmmmm....sounds like the
topic of
another thread.
>
As I said, no aspersions on anyone who chooses that lifestyle just for that
reason, tho to overgeneralize i think that those who choose it, like cops,
are more likely to be those who enjoy the use of power, and possibly the
abuse of it. I have already thanked several of the group (Steve -
proznhenwhatis, and Nuc I believe) for their service to all, and by
extension to me. I was mainly feeling guilty about being dismayed by all
the pro-military people, and wanted to get it out in the open.
>But, the military is not for everyone. After all, the only reason for the
>military is to keep our way of life secure for poets, artists and writers.
Damn right, let's keep the grunts in their place, serving us better people
(sarcasm people, put the guns down!)
I think Asimov wrote some very pointed, short stories about this very fact.
Can you name some? I haven't read much of his short fiction, the occasional
one in anthologies, and would look for them.
>Still, they are indispensable to protecting our way of life as is an
informed electorate and a response government. Gee, why do I suddenly feel
less
sure about things in the future? :-)
>Best regards,
>Randy
>--
>Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
>rj...@zianet.com
Join the party. <bg>
labert
labert
>labert wrote:
>
>> If I'd voiced my objections strongly enuf, my parents may not have
expected me
to be confirmed. They'd already agreed that once confirmed, I could attend
or not as I chose.
>
>they weren't going to make you go to church after, why not let you get
>confirmed if and when you chose.
>
>Phebe
I beleive the reasoning was that I should get the full experience, then
decide. But yes, perhaps it was illogical.
Phebe
>
> As a rule, I'm not too fussy about her "unmentionables"---not as long
> as she's comfortable in them and they come off easily---but I really
> do hate those cotton things that go up past the belly button. What
> the hell _is_ that? A built-in apron, er sumpthin?
>
> D'android
That's how you tell the honeymoon is over, Android: when we stop wearing
the uncomfortable Victoria's Secret stuff and come to bed in extra-large
Garfield T-shirts and full-cut cotton panties. We know we shouldn't ----
but they're a LOT more comfortable.
Phebe
Nuclear Waste
labert wrote in message <77bl0l$7u9$2...@news1.fast.net>...
Snip
|>|Theory B: Since I rule the universe, I can appoint myself anything I
|>like, and I wish all my subjects would quit questioning me, dammit.
|>
|>Aye-aye! *snaps a salute*
|
|The wife and I both guffawing!
Glad to oblige! ;)
|>I do not get hangovers aas a rule. :) Sick, but there it is. (No
|>seasickness either.) For otherr drugs the VA gives me anything I
could
|>possibly want. See, being a veteran has more benefits than you
thought!
|
|Sure, gloat about all those things, why doncha.
Hey, you have to celebrate something! I keep these things in mind for
Thanksgiving. ;)
NW
Nuclear Waste
Phebe wrote in message <369A78...@bellatlantic.net>...
Which is why all my darn t shirts are always gone with the last
girlfriend! Why must you gals take our shirts and make them
nightclothes?
NW
jani
labert wrote >>
>
>On a side note, I'm beginning to feel like I don't fit in here.
Heyyy?? And we were all so pleased to see you back here?
I'm not
>exactly a gourmet, tho I enjoy a good steak,
Jim, Jeff and Greg (when *he* gets back) are i/c recipes. The women have
more important things to worry about than tending the barbecue <G>
I'm not military, I'm
>partially a socialist,
Well, they didn't throw *me* out for those reasons <G>
and I don't share this fascination with alcohol that
>ya'll seem to have.
*Quality* alcohol. Teenage drunks aren't allowed. (Look, I check IDs, and
when did I ever let John have his Stoli? :-) Not till next month, anyway)
would I feel the need to indulge in recreational
>drugs, I recall a few that were a lot more fun and a lot more useful than
>alcohol, without the hangover. Tho come to think of it, its rather
annoying
>that the gov will let you indulge your choice, but not let me choose mine.
Wanna start a thread on the medical marijuana initiative? <G>
Labert, the only teachers we have here are me, you, cryo-Randy and Jim's mum
(who doesn't post, just reads over his shoulder <waving> Hi, Jim's mum!) We
need more!
Seriously, the ng is not entirely composed of alcoholics, gourmet chefs and
military gentlemen. You fit in fine.
Jani
jani
Android wrote
Jani wrote
>
>>Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
>
>I'm guessing your question was for that other fella whose parents
>stole my name, but what the hell...
Interchangeable Dans? <G> No, my bad snippage, I expect. Sorry...
>
>What, pray tell, is wrong with a women's underwear thread? I'd bet
>my "bottom" dollar that RAH enjoyed such discussions.
Nothing wrong at all. I just worry about Ogden's blood pressure, after the
Victoria's Secret thread, and John coughing his coffee all over the keyboard
:-)
>
>As a rule, I'm not too fussy about her "unmentionables"---not as long
>as she's comfortable in them and they come off easily---but I really
>do hate those cotton things that go up past the belly button. What
>the hell _is_ that? A built-in apron, er sumpthin?
You've lost me there. Cotton is not a material I'm familiar with, on these
discussions. Lycra, lace, rubber, yes, but cotton? A cotton thing which
went *down* would be a broderie-anglaise semi-boned basque, but a cotton
thing which goes *up*? Does it hook into a crop-top?
Jani
(who just realised she's totally blown her cover regarding knowledge of
exotic underwear. It was just a sales job, guys, honest!)
jani
Danxerox wrote
>labert wrote
And *you* lot can stay online all the time, and reply to messages in
breaks - I have three downloads a day, one posting session, and by then most
of you are asleep! No wonder I'm always last into the punch-ups <G>
Jani
>
>
jani
John M. Atkinson wrote
Jani wrote
>
>>unexpectedly on several threads. Please take care when passing Mr
Atkinson's
>>cage; the Libertarian thrown to him for lunch evidently did not agree with
>>him. :-)
>
>Dear God In Heaven!
>
>You CANNOT concieve how funny I find this statement. First, the
>background.
>
>I borrowed a copy of Jim Baen's New Destinies, Volume IX, Fall 1990.
>In it is the very short story "Thus I Refute Kafka" by John J.
>Ordover. In this story, a man is arguing with a roach. I can't quote
>the whole thing (copywrite, it's short enough), but the roach is
>arguing for a meaning and order to the Universe and the man is saying
>that the universe is composed of meaningless chaotic patterns. The
>roach says "Don't you feel the Universe has any rules at all?" and the
>man says "Might makes right" and eats the roach. Then the man has
>some questions about whether it was wrong to have destroyed another
>intelligent being just to make a philisophical point. His roommate
>notes his upset and asks if he has the flu that was going around.
>
>"No," I answered, "I just ate something that disagreed with me."
John, I don't know if I read this as a short story or I heard it as a joke,
but I know the one you mean. I think there's a derivative in Python as well.
Either way, I always felt it was applicable to you <G>
Jani
Android
Phebe <inti...@bellatlantic.net> to write:
>Android wrote:
>
>>
>> As a rule, I'm not too fussy about her "unmentionables"---not as long
>> as she's comfortable in them and they come off easily---but I really
>> do hate those cotton things that go up past the belly button. What
>> the hell _is_ that? A built-in apron, er sumpthin?
>>
>> D'android
>
>That's how you tell the honeymoon is over, Android: when we stop wearing
>the uncomfortable Victoria's Secret stuff and come to bed in extra-large
>Garfield T-shirts and full-cut cotton panties. We know we shouldn't ----
>but they're a LOT more comfortable.
As I said, _her_ comfort is paramount in this area---and t-shirts are
just fine, too. I will admit to liking the sexier VS type stuff,
but there is a time and place for everything...
Why go all the way up to the rib-cage, though? Her jeans and skirts
don't go up that far. <g>
And I'll have you know, when the honeymoon is _really_ over the
relationship is likey dying, too.
Android
"jani" <ja...@sveiss.demon.co.uk> to write:
Android wrote:
>>As a rule, I'm not too fussy about her "unmentionables"---not as long
>>as she's comfortable in them and they come off easily---but I really
>>do hate those cotton things that go up past the belly button. What
>>the hell _is_ that? A built-in apron, er sumpthin?
>
>You've lost me there. Cotton is not a material I'm familiar with, on these
>discussions. Lycra, lace, rubber, yes, but cotton? A cotton thing which
>went *down* would be a broderie-anglaise semi-boned basque, but a cotton
>thing which goes *up*? Does it hook into a crop-top?
LOL. Nothing like that, dear. Just good old-fashioned "comfortable"
underwear. The kind that covers the anatomy from just above the knees
to just below the breasts. Sorry if I'm offending anyone, but they
don't do a damn thing for me.
Pixelmeow
>To whomever knows what to do, if anything
>
>> Last night, 1/10/99, at 2244 hours, I posted a happy Birthday message to
>Teresa,
>> through this newsgroup. using a reply to group icon. As of 0849 hours
>1/11/99,
>> (all times PST), this posting has not appeared on the ng, at least, not on
>my
>> screen.
>
>I am of the impression that there is a lot of this.
>
>Now what, troops??
>
>Bob
>
Well, I saw it, and I thank you again!
George Houston
Randy J. Jost wrote in message <369932A9...@zianet.com>...
>But, the military is not for everyone. After all, the only reason for the
>military is to keep our way of life secure for poets, artists and
writers>--
>Randy J. Jost, PhD, PE
>rj...@zianet.com
>
OK, I agree, but I have a small problem with this, - in the interests of
debate you understand.
Being non-military myself, although father and grandfather both served,
Heinlein has caused me to think about the need for the military. The point
above seems to say that the military is in place to protect the *best things
in life*. My problem with this is that IMHO, most people do not participate
in the *best things in life*. Most people are not artists, philosophers,
etc.
I apprectiate that your list is not definitive by any stretch of the
imagination, but surely the point of the MIC is not just to protect the
*best things in life*, but to protect the state!!!!
IOW, it is irrelevant how productive a state is, whether in terms of its
intellectual, or artistic or economic communities, it is the really the
state in terms of its political machine, its ways of doing things, and its
mind-set, that the Military is really there to protect.
Whether or not this is A Bad Thing, or A Good Thing depends upon where you
are in the hierarchy of the *system*
George
George Houston
jani wrote in message
<916103482.21954.7...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
>
>Wanna start a thread on the medical marijuana initiative? <G>
>
>
Yeah! About bloody time too!! I know people with MS who have used M for pain
relief, and they are convinced it works. How the h**l does a Gov'mt get away
with crap like
'Well, you can't use it because it is a controlled drug'. Who controlled it
in the first place!!
(sorry - sore point)
George
Danxerox
jani wrote
<snip, we can all be what we want to be>
>Danxerox wrote
>>I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
>>
>>Danxerox.
>
>Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
Umm, I've no idea what you're going on about.
As I was saying....
I've always wanted to be .... a lumberjack!
Leaping from tree to tree, as they float down the mighty rivers of British
Columbia.... ;-)
Danxerox.
Danxerox
jani wrote
>Danxerox wrote
<snip, me and my AFH jones>
>And *you* lot can stay online all the time, and reply to messages in
>breaks - I have three downloads a day, one posting session, and by then
most
>of you are asleep! No wonder I'm always last into the punch-ups <G>
>
>Jani
Really? I thought you were just trying to elevate the anticipation and
suspense round here, keeping us on tenterhooks as it were. Aren't there any
unlimited access ISPs in G.B.?
Danxerox.
Android
"George Houston" <G.M.H...@btinternet.com> to write:
jani wrote:
>>Wanna start a thread on the medical marijuana initiative? <G>
>Yeah! About bloody time too!! I know people with MS who have used M for pain
>relief, and they are convinced it works. How the h**l does a Gov'mt get away
>with crap like
>
>'Well, you can't use it because it is a controlled drug'. Who controlled it
>in the first place!!
>
>(sorry - sore point)
Roll another one, George!! I hear it takes care of sore points,
too. Or was that sore "joints"? <g>
In all seriousness though, I couldn't agree more. The levels of
hypocrisy and ignorance within a society that "encourages" booze while
sending people to jail for possession of marijuana are beyond belief!
Ogden Johnson III
: IOW, it is irrelevant how productive a state is, whether in terms of its
: intellectual, or artistic or economic communities, it is the really the
: state in terms of its political machine, its ways of doing things, and its
: mind-set, that the Military is really there to protect.
Contrary to what is, regrettably becoming common belief, the military,
individually and collectively, take their oath to 'protect and defend the
Constitution' deadly seriously indeed. [OK, there is a green side
out/brown side out element, 'The 10%'[TM].] Also, although it can chafe
at times, they take the civilian control of the military by people who
have taken the same oath equally seriously. Much has been made here [and
elsewhere, it is a common argument] about 'undeclared wars'. Congress,
through its power of the purse, exercises control of any such excursions
by a rogue president, and therefore, by its appropriations, ratifies any
such 'undeclared war'. Further, the people exercise the ultimate in
ratification/non-ratification of any such 'undeclared war', in their
franchise.
Damn Ike for those words [just the words, as everyone else did at the
time, I liked Ike]. Any MIC that exists, does so with the full direction
and approval of Congress. The military gets no weapons or weapons systems
that it wants without the approval and micromanagement of congress.
Indeed, the frequent situation is that they get things that they don't
want or need with the approval and micromanagement of congress. A couple
of decades ago it was trucks from Wisconsin or some frozen state like
that, this year it was C-130s from Georgia [Newt's last hurrah in the
world of pork, as it were]. Neither is a unique case, rather examples of
business as usual within the hallowed halls of the Capitol building.
OJ III
Ogden Johnson III
[cite of snip of Jani snipped]
: >Danxerox wrote
: >>I've always wanted to be.... a lumberjack! ;-)
To which Jani:
: >Are you attempting to start the women's underwear thread again, Dan? :-))
: Umm, I've no idea what you're going on about.
Obviously not a Python fan.
: As I was saying....
:
: I've always wanted to be .... a lumberjack!
I would suggest you check out some Python tapes, or check out the
retrospection show that is floating around the cable channels somewhere.
It will forever revise your perspective of lumberjacks.
OJ III
George Houston
Ogden Johnson III wrote in message ...
>George Houston (G.M.H...@btinternet.com) wrote:
>
>: IOW, it is irrelevant how productive a state is, whether in terms of its
>: intellectual, or artistic or economic communities, it is the really the
>: state in terms of its political machine, its ways of doing things, and
its
>: mind-set, that the Military is really there to protect.
>
>Contrary to what is, regrettably becoming common belief, the military,
>individually and collectively, take their oath to 'protect and defend the
>Constitution' deadly seriously indeed.
I may be wrong, but is not the constitution the written manifestation of
statehood?
[OK, there is a green side
>out/brown side out element, 'The 10%'[TM].] Also, although it can chafe
>at times, they take the civilian control of the military by people who
>have taken the same oath equally seriously. Much has been made here [and
>elsewhere, it is a common argument] about 'undeclared wars'. Congress,
>through its power of the purse, exercises control of any such excursions
>by a rogue president, and therefore, by its appropriations, ratifies any
>such 'undeclared war'. Further, the people exercise the ultimate in
>ratification/non-ratification of any such 'undeclared war', in their
>franchise.
Wee difficulty where the vote takes place a few years after the event?
>Damn Ike for those words [just the words, as everyone else did at the
>time, I liked Ike]. Any MIC that exists, does so with the full direction
>and approval of Congress. The military gets no weapons or weapons systems
>that it wants without the approval and micromanagement of congress.
>Indeed, the frequent situation is that they get things that they don't
>want or need with the approval and micromanagement of congress. A couple
>of decades ago it was trucks from Wisconsin or some frozen state like
>that, this year it was C-130s from Georgia [Newt's last hurrah in the
>world of pork, as it were].
Is this not a communication issue rather than a control issue?
> Neither is a unique case, rather examples of
>business as usual within the hallowed halls of the Capitol building.
>
>OJ III
Overall, You is right! I agree, and the point I was trying to make is that
the military is there to protect the whole state. Whether or not they are
poets etc. This works fine in a democracy (or whatever we like to think we
are living in), where there are civilian controls - the most important
being, of course, financial.
Where it falls down, and from previous posts I think you'll agree, is where
the military IS the state.
This, in most civilians mind, is the real danger of the MIC, and there is
always a concern that in the deep and dark corridors of power, things ain't
always what they seem to be! Ah, the joys of a conspiracy theory!!
Danxerox
Ogden Johnson III wrote
<snip, a misunderstanding, mea culpa, mea culpa>
Yes, I came here for an argument!! (oops, wrong sketch)
Sorry for the confusion, been a loony spotter since my early teens and I was
just being a little silly. The bit about "leaping from tree to tree as they
float..." is part of the prelude to the MP "Lumberjack" song, as for the
"I've no idea..." well... I've no idea what that was about, must be time for
my "getting hit in the head lessons again. :-(
Danxerox
John M. Atkinson
wrote:
>As I said, no aspersions on anyone who chooses that lifestyle just for that
>reason, tho to overgeneralize i think that those who choose it, like cops,
>are more likely to be those who enjoy the use of power, and possibly the
>abuse of it. I have already thanked several of the group (Steve -
Methinks your life experience has been extremely skewed--how many
soldiers do you know PERSONALLY? I, of course, am third generation US
Army, and spent the first ten years of my life on Army posts. Plus
the area where I live has a significant percentage of military
personell. This was before I enlisted myself. I've run into a
handful of control freaks, but not very many. Even Drill Sergeants
aren't such once you see them without their Hat on.
John M. Atkinson
'erols' instead of spamblock
"Ultimately, most problems can be solved by applying a large
brick to the correct skull. Difficulties arise when you don't
have a brick or can't find the right skull. The devil is always
in the details."
--Marcus Cole
John M. Atkinson
<G.M.H...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>I apprectiate that your list is not definitive by any stretch of the
>imagination, but surely the point of the MIC is not just to protect the
>*best things in life*, but to protect the state!!!!
>
>IOW, it is irrelevant how productive a state is, whether in terms of its
>intellectual, or artistic or economic communities, it is the really the
>state in terms of its political machine, its ways of doing things, and its
>mind-set, that the Military is really there to protect.
>
>Whether or not this is A Bad Thing, or A Good Thing depends upon where you
>are in the hierarchy of the *system*
Funny, when I swore my oath, it wasn't to the State, but to the
Constitution of the United States of America. The State can kiss my
ass--and should it fall into the category of "enemies, foreign and
domestic" then it and it's agents get a 5.56mm in the head, same as
anyone else.
John M. Atkinson
<G.M.H...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>Contrary to what is, regrettably becoming common belief, the military,
>>individually and collectively, take their oath to 'protect and defend the
>>Constitution' deadly seriously indeed.
>
>I may be wrong, but is not the constitution the written manifestation of
>statehood?
If that's all it is to you, so be it.
>>such 'undeclared war'. Further, the people exercise the ultimate in
>>ratification/non-ratification of any such 'undeclared war', in their
>>franchise.
>
>Wee difficulty where the vote takes place a few years after the event?
That's the thing about living in a representative democracy vis an
Athenian participatory democracy.
>>Damn Ike for those words [just the words, as everyone else did at the
>>time, I liked Ike]. Any MIC that exists, does so with the full direction
>>and approval of Congress. The military gets no weapons or weapons systems
>>that it wants without the approval and micromanagement of congress.
>>Indeed, the frequent situation is that they get things that they don't
>>want or need with the approval and micromanagement of congress. A couple
>>of decades ago it was trucks from Wisconsin or some frozen state like
>>that, this year it was C-130s from Georgia [Newt's last hurrah in the
>>world of pork, as it were].
>
>Is this not a communication issue rather than a control issue?
No. Every year the military requests to cancel these programs. Every
year Congress puts them back in the budget anyway.
>Where it falls down, and from previous posts I think you'll agree, is where
>the military IS the state.
It would be meaningless.
George Houston
John M. Atkinson wrote in message <36a58dec....@news.erols.com>...
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 15:57:30 -0000, "George Houston"
><G.M.H...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>I may be wrong, but is not the constitution the written manifestation of
>>statehood?
>
>If that's all it is to you, so be it.
John, it aint't nuthin to me, I'm a Brit and we don't have a written
constitution. I don't grok the difference, but OK, I'll accept there is one.
This is probably not the venue to continue such a discussion.
>>>such 'undeclared war'. Further, the people exercise the ultimate in
>>>ratification/non-ratification of any such 'undeclared war', in their
>>>franchise.
>>
>>Wee difficulty where the vote takes place a few years after the event?
>
>That's the thing about living in a representative democracy vis an
>Athenian participatory democracy.
Of course, and consequently, ratification of an action (as a specific) in
this context is null
. A couple
>>>of decades ago it was trucks from Wisconsin or some frozen state like
>>>that, this year it was C-130s from Georgia [Newt's last hurrah in the
>>>world of pork, as it were].
>>
>>Is this not a communication issue rather than a control issue?
>
>No. Every year the military requests to cancel these programs. Every
>year Congress puts them back in the budget anyway.
Why????
>>Where it falls down, and from previous posts I think you'll agree, is
where
>>the military IS the state.
>
>It would be meaningless.
Any military dictatorship would disagree, unless we have a clash of
semantics again.
George
Nuclear Waste
Pete LaGrange wrote in message
<369be7be...@news.injersey.infi.net>...
|On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 15:34:12 GMT, o...@cpcug.org (Ogden Johnson III)
|wrote:
|
|>
|>Damn Ike for those words [just the words, as everyone else did at the
|>time, I liked Ike]. Any MIC that exists, does so with the full
direction
|>and approval of Congress. The military gets no weapons or weapons
systems
|>that it wants without the approval and micromanagement of congress.
|>Indeed, the frequent situation is that they get things that they don't
couple
|>of decades ago it was trucks from Wisconsin or some frozen state like
|>that, this year it was C-130s from Georgia [Newt's last hurrah in the
of
|>business as usual within the hallowed halls of the Capitol building.
|>
|>OJ III
|
|
|Greenland to Athens, Greece and every place in between, dropped fuel,
|tanks and men....even hay to starving cattle...hauled stuff I can't
|remember (per my uncles orders) and people I'd like to forget. Landed
|25 tons of cargo on a 1500 (that's fifteen hundred) foot runway.All
|without regard to weather or conditions. Frankly, I fail to see the
|need for any OTHER type of aircraft
You mean, of course, aside from the A-7 and the F-14.
NW
John M. Atkinson
<G.M.H...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>I may be wrong, but is not the constitution the written manifestation of
>>>statehood?
>>
>>If that's all it is to you, so be it.
>John, it aint't nuthin to me, I'm a Brit and we don't have a written
>constitution. I don't grok the difference, but OK, I'll accept there is one.
>This is probably not the venue to continue such a discussion.
Oh. Didn't realize. In your case "Constitution" is semantically null
term. Y'all ain't got one, so it's a little fuzzy.
>>>>such 'undeclared war'. Further, the people exercise the ultimate in
>>>>ratification/non-ratification of any such 'undeclared war', in their
>>>>franchise.
>>>
>>>Wee difficulty where the vote takes place a few years after the event?
>>
>>That's the thing about living in a representative democracy vis an
>>Athenian participatory democracy.
>
>Of course, and consequently, ratification of an action (as a specific) in
>this context is null
No--an unpopular war will have everyone who voted for it booted out of
office. Such an awareness of the consequences of public opinion has a
dampening effect really bizairre military adventures.
>>No. Every year the military requests to cancel these programs. Every
>>year Congress puts them back in the budget anyway.
>
>Why????
Control. The Congress has unconditional control of spending, subject
only to presidential veto, who has to accept or reject the whole
thing. If they wish to assign umpteen gazillion dollars to widget
bying, and the President can't afford to veto for whatever reasons,
then those dollars are spent.
>>>Where it falls down, and from previous posts I think you'll agree, is
>where
>>>the military IS the state.
>>
>>It would be meaningless.
>
>Any military dictatorship would disagree, unless we have a clash of
>semantics again.
Indeed.
Android
"jani" <ja...@sveiss.demon.co.uk> to write:
<snip>
>Labert, the only teachers we have here are me, you, cryo-Randy and Jim's mum
>(who doesn't post, just reads over his shoulder <waving> Hi, Jim's mum!) We
>need more!
Well, I have a brother and sister who both retired from the
profession last year. And one other brother who realised early into
his teaching career that it wasn't for him. That help?
> Seriously, the ng is not entirely composed of alcoholics, gourmet chefs and
>military gentlemen. You fit in fine.
Alcohol use is pretty rare in my household---a gradual decline from
moderation to nothingness over the last decade or so. I do enjoy
experimenting in the kitchen occasionally but "time" does not often
permit such pleasures. No military involvement on my part [[strongly
averse to being "ordered" around---my boss learned that real fast :-]]
but a very real appreciation of its import and a number of good
friends with former and current experience who would remind me if I
ever forgot.
I agree with Loki, you fit in just fine.