Nobody’s Absurdities, No. 47
Nobody’s Absurdities:
“Truth is an unseen quality that emanates from the masculine principle. A lie is the lack of truth in the absence of manliness.” ET..I mean EG.
So, does this mean that this motorcycle does not exist?
I’m so glad EG said that, and not someone like Gandhi. Truth is now sexual, and lies are now feminine, which means if guys…lie, they are gay?
Could you be just a little more clear on this?
Being nebulous is always a good way to get out of absurd statements.
I certainly would like to get back to being myself again…BUT….
If I don’t say at least SOMETHING about EG’s last personal attack on me, than EG will, like the jihads over in Iraq, think that I’ve conceded the points he made, and that he is right about women never having an original thought in their lives: Hedy Lamarr is basically being a whore with no brain according to him, and Joyanna Williams (see Nobody Cares) is so pathetically starving for attention…that she just knew, by answering his silly hypothesized point (that no one woman ever in the world ever thought up a “conceptual’ invention)…that she would get plenty of attention, thereby trying to prove her own “superiority.”
Yes, if you disagree with Elder George, you want attention. Watch out, Elder George is now a practicing psychiatrist.
Elder George, you are a real pip. You ask for “one woman,” as proof, and I gave you one.
Trust me George…if anyone is superior here on this earth, it’s not you or me.
Frankly, I’d rather be writing about more important things…like the fact that Hillary Clinton plans to, when elected, supply the whole continent of Africa with new schools for all the kids, and her husband is giving away cows and farms all over the world, at OUR expense, thereby destroying the Ozone with cow flatulent, so that Al Gore can make money. No kidding…no one is reporting this absurdity.
To me, that’s my part in stopping this Marxist/feminist takeover of the world.
(sigh)
And yet, even if I was not enlightened by EG’s “poetry,” some good came out of the arguments. Mike LaSalle, was brilliant and educated us all on logic and principles: amfortas was the usual enumerating professor of life: Kate M supplied some pretty good stuff, and I really enjoyed Artfldgr’s comments. Thank you sir for all that you wrote on the subject…boy do I know where you are coming from, having been there myself.
And all the other writers put in their two cents…all were cordial, except for Mr. 666.
If you want to know the frustrations of an inventor…read Artfldgr’s poignant comments. Being an inventor is getting harder, with globalization. (Oh, that must be a woman’s fault.)
The feminists movement was started (big time anyway) by Marxists of the university’s in the 1960’s and women were forced back into the work force. This whole “movement” was planned (Rockefeller has admitted it.) to get women back into the work force …and some women just had to go back to work just to feed themselves, because of all the divorces. Not all of them got rich divorce settlements. What a mess the “sexual revolution” bought.
Of course men built the world. Of course more men get patents than women. I never said they didn’t. Of course some women are evil, and so are some men.
If you haven’t learned that by now, you never will.
But to say that no woman on earth could ever conceive an idea is, sorry– pretty stupid.
Here is a fact: Almost all inventions are built on the ideas that came before them. Very few “men” (feel better?) wake up and say, “Oh…I think I’ll make an MRI today.” …right out of the clear blue sky.
EG cannot help that he never invented anything…conceptual. It’s hard to understand when you don’t know the real process of inventing. Artfldgr did an excellent job trying to explain it.
Tell me. If you wanted to find out about “inventing” would you believe a man who thinks up philosophical theories, or would you ask actual inventors? (My patents have ONLY my name on them.) Would you ask a doctor to take out your spleen— or a mechanic?
I presented inventor’s educational opinions as evidence, EG presented…himself.
EG…I don’t know where you get your credentials on this.
Did you know that a man named Meucci developed the telephone, and was unable to develop it because he didn’t have the $250 application fee? Bell, developed his “invention” in the same lab that Meucci’s prototype was kept, in other words, he copied it. And THEN, a man named Grey actually filed before Bell, but Bell got his to the right people FIRST and was given the patent. So he ripped off two men. Therefore..
Ahhhhh…..
“Of course, people can sometimes reasonably differ on the obviousness of a piece of evidence cited in an argument, or they can blind themselves to the truth and can even refuse to listen to rational argument at all. The best intellectual reasoning can fail completely to overrule strongly opposed passions.” …Tom Morris, PhD. Philosophy for Dummies.
And to end this, I thought that scottkirk said something that was a very good point;
“I think E.G. and a few others are simply counter-attacking after 40 years of vile feminists demagoguery that has thrown America into Chaos.”
You know what Scott? I think you’re right.
And the whole thing was fun…
But one more thing…
Nobody’s Cares: There is only ONE thing that truly amazed me about EG’s “truth.” He was obviously SO upset about my mentioning that I got my proclivity for writing from my ancestry, that somehow he looked up my “maiden” name…and he didn’t even get that right. He just had to go and get all PMSie and he thinks, proved me a “fraud.” He even threw in a nasty comment from an e-mail he got.
Yes, once again EG…you got it wrong.
I was born Joyce Ann Williams. My father, Dale Williams was German/Polish/ Prussian…but it was on my mother’s side that I get the Adams’ gene.
Which means in EG's world, it’s not valid.
My mother’s father…George Hart's mother was related to the Adams. …(see picture of George, with picture of John Quincy Adams here…you must scroll down to the bottom of the page, look for A CALL TO ARMS…and compare.)
The top one is George Hart (my grandfather)…the bottom is John Quincy Adams taken when he was about 80.
All the men on my mother's side look like that..bald, short, stubby..even my mother looked like a female version of John Adams, poor thing. Good thing I look like my English grandmother, Anna.
It was my first entry on my "blog."
George’s mother was Francis Adams, (descendant of the founding Adams) and his father was Orion Hart.
In fact, going back farther to the beginning of the country, the Harts and Adams were all over Braintree…they often married…Harts and Adams.
The Harts and Adams alone probably alone filled up half the country, before the revolution even started.
The Harts and Adams came over on the same boat as Thomas Hooker. (Founder of CT) They went to live in Braintree, named after Braintree of Wales. The Harts helped the Hookers found the little schoolhouse that later became Harvard. Hartford was named after John Hart…
I even have a land deed from 1763 that my grandfather gave me….when King George was still ruling America…John Hart selling his land to the son of Thomas Hooker. (It’s pretty cool)
It's in Old English..and is real proof of how far our educational system has come. (that's a joke.)
John Hart (Orion’s ancestor) had a farm on ford of the river, and everyone use to say, when giving directions; “Just go down to Hart’s ford.”…which morphed into Hartford.
Our family has done a genealogical research, it’s really fun to read. One guy got killed by a mule. One guy had a rock fall on him. If you have never done one, you should, they are really funny.
Anyway, when I was a musician, I went under the name Joy Fushia, because when you are a public figure, you do not want to use your real name to protect yourself from nuts, and family reasons. People can't look you up in the phone book.
I thought, in honor of my ancestors, and because I am mostly interested about politics, I would make up a name…much like Mark Twain made up his name. So Joy (short for Joyce) …Anna, (after my dear grandmother) and Adams…
So, Elder George. Why you went looking for “information” on me is beyond me. I thought it was rather…hateful. After all, I didn’t go looking for your last name…surely your first name is not Elder. And I respect your privacy. It's the decent thing to do when in public.
And if you go looking to find out the name that I sign my checks by, or the name that is my married name, I hope that you will have the decency to not reveal this information, because I have a son, and a husband, whom I do not want hurt by anything that I might say now, or in the future.
I’d advise you against it. It’s a matter of my privacy.
In any case…I’m a mutt just like all the rest of America. I got my eyes from my grandma, my musical ability from my dad, my “inventor’s” proclivities from my dad, and my mind from my mother.
My brother on the other hand, is an alein.
And my horrible addicting habit of collecting books, loving to write, loving justice, truth and honesty in all men, and loving the subjects of politics, I got from the Adams. Oh, they also had a habit of having men think they were conceited.
Which you obviously think I am because you wouldn't have gotten so upset.
As far as thinking that George– trust me, you couldn't be farther from the truth. You have NO idea.
Anything else that upsets you about me can be blamed on “unseen” spiritual truths of which I have no control.
So, what do you think? I bet you any money a woman thought up that motorcycle and a man just put it together.
I don't care who invented it…I want one.
I am a nobody. If the different classes of America were color-coded, I would be in your yucky brown, one rink up from the bottom. I grew up in Naples, Florida and live near the Mississippi River now with my husband and two dogs. I am part of the slowly disappearing middle-class. I was a musician most of my life;drummer/singer/keyboards---but I retired before the plastic surgery flu hit. I have no degrees, which could be a good thing...depending on how you view our educational system. I do have three patents...but that really doesn't make me a somebody. The one thing that is constant in my life is my OPINIONS...which I have more of than perhaps even Carl Sagan could have imagined, mostly political. Hopefully other nobodys will put their opinions on my site. But if you are a sombody...you're more than welcomed to help out. I will try to prove that sometimes nobody knows the answers, sometimes nobody cares, sometimes nobody wins, and most importantly...NOBODY is perfect. Please bear this in mind when you read my thoughts. I don't mean to offend nobody, it's all in good fun. | More from Joyanna Adams
Stumble It!
July 12th, 2007 at 8:12 am
infidel says: “Nobody can get any information about me unless Mike gives it out.”
Or someone researches you and puts the info in a comment. People are increasingly vulnerable to someone else’s snooping.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:25 am
Dad’s with girls…here you go:
Alphabet blocks Adeline D. T. Whitney 1882
Apgar tests, which evaluate a baby’s health upon birth Virginia Apgar 1952
Chocolate-chip cookies Ruth Wakefield 1930
Circular saw Tabitha Babbitt 1812
Dishwasher Josephine Cochran 1872
Disposable diaper Marion Donovan 1950
Electric hot water heater Ida Forbes 1917
Elevated railway Mary Walton 1881
Engine muffler El Dorado Jones 1917
Fire escape Anna Connelly 1887
Globes Ellen Fitz 1875
Ironing board Sarah Boone 1892
Kevlar, a steel-like fiber used in radial tires, crash helmets, and bulletproof vests Stephanie Kwolek 1966
Life raft Maria Beaseley 1882
Liquid Paper®, a quick-drying liquid used to correct mistakes printed on paper Bessie Nesmith 1951
Locomotive chimney Mary Walton 1879
Medical syringe Letitia Geer 1899
Paper-bag-making machine Margaret Knight 1871
Rolling pin Catherine Deiner 1891
Rotary engine Margaret Knight 1904
Scotchgard™ fabric protector Patsy O. Sherman 1956
Snugli® baby carrier Ann Moore 1965
Street-cleaning machine Florence Parpart 1900
Submarine lamp and telescope Sarah Mather 1845
Windshield wiper Mary Anderson 1903
Its a few more than 10 but easy enough.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:53 am
were talking about an accussation that will villify an old man for something he did or did not do..and all options must be considered…
I’m not one to jump into hysterical lyncheing mode that easy/ if at all.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:39 am
what are the odds that williams is not her name..and she made a false accussation under pressure from the blog.
Women under any sort of pressure is the number 1 cause of a false accussation..
I’ve read of false rape accussations because the women was late for work!!!
July 11th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Ah, but what of the Rule of Thumb Principle?
Whose absurdities are we talking about here? Douglas Adams’ or Joyanna Adams’?
A hitch-hike is in order.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Someone said: “But folks. I am sorry that hardly anyone has stuck to the point. What of YOUR privacy here?”
Nobody can get any information about me unless Mike gives it out. And I trust him not to do that. Even then, Mike only has my email address, not my actual name. You can always get a hotmail or yahoo address and use that, and then he won’t even have your regular email address. So I’m not worried about my privacy.
An computer security expert from McAfee once said you should have about 20 different email addresses. Why not at least have a few?
Can’t we just give EG the benefit of the doubt and move on?
July 11th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Oops: 7942 is out of the range 1 to 1000. OK, let’s say 794 instead of 7942.
July 11th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Jackal said, “If Williams’s only number 10% of the population, then the odds would be 10%.”
*What* odds would be only 10%?
If 10% of the people are called Williams, and if we took a person from the general population at *random*, there would be a 10% chance their name is Williams.
But Joyanna is not a person selected at random. She is a Williams (so she says, and we assume it to be true). So the % of Williams’s is not relevant. The relevant question is not what are the odds of *having* that name, but what are the odds of *guessing* that name. That depends on were the name is on the list of common names (i.e. where it is on the list I cited) not on how many people actually have that name.
For example, let’s take the name Smith. According to the link I cited above, there are about 3 million Smiths in the USA. That’s out of a population of say, 300 million. i.e. about 1% are Smiths.
But, if I had to guess the name of a person at random, I would choose Smith every time, even though only 1% of the people are Smiths, because I know Smith is the most common name. In other words, I’d choose Smith 100% of the time, even though I know only 1% are Smiths.
Ask someone who has not seen the list to guess the name of a person at random, they would likely choose something like Smith, Jones, Brown, or maybe Williams, because they know these are common names. The name Smith would could up a lot more than 1% of the time even though only 1% of the people are Smiths. So there will be a disproportionate number of people guessing Smith.
So the key is what names will people guess. And that depends on what people perceive to be a common name. That in turn depends a lot on where the name ranks on the list.
The example of the 6 sided die is not valid here because it’s about what names come to *mind*.
If I asked people to pick any number from 1 to 1000, I’d bet that the numbers 3 or 7 would come up more often that say 421 or 7942, because 3 and 7 are more ‘popular’ with people. But if I had a computer generate the numbers at random (or if I had a 1000 sided die), the numbers 3, 7, 421, and 7942 would all have an equal chance of coming up.
The computer and the die do not work like the human mind. The human mind will pick 3, 7 or Smith or Williams more often that you would expect them to come up by pure chance. Because these numbers and names are more popular, they come to mind more often. The list I used is merely an indication that Williams is a very popular name.
Also, Williams is more similar to Adams that Smith, Johnson, Jones, Brown, Davis, or any of the others in the top 10.
July 11th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
PS –
Mike LaSalle has every man’s back here, as near as I can tell.
He gives more than he takes.
That is rare, indeed.
I’m curious about how it will all evolve.
You?
July 11th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
*( Mike LaSalle) — “Q. Is it possible for a woman to invent?”
Yes, it is.
Could you please name ten (that’s charitable, don’t you think?) –
INVENTIONS.
By women?
That affect and benefit your daily life.
As a man.
(And please do not use anything by Madame Currie.)
Go for it!
July 11th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Lordy, the conversations that go on when you are asleep.
Apologies are hard to come by, so I will attempt to push-start the process by saying I am sorry if I have offended EG by suggesting that he ‘investigated’ Joyanna, and sorry if so many noses were put out of joint. Offence wasn’t intended but I guess it came with the questioning of the privacy issue.
As for it being like a false accusation, and by implication I am being accused of making a false accusation (!) well, I am not offended by that one, having really been falsely accused before myself, I can see a huge difference. So no aplogy for that one. Sorry.
I am astonished and delighted at the turn of the conversation to probability and game theory, and the sortie into Freud am Jungland. MND has a great reputation for generating so many twists and turns in its threads, from many wonderful minds, including EG’s, but it does tend to depart from the point. I am sorry that EG doesn’t want to have a beer with me. (The beer offer is still open old fella)
I am sorry that EG doesn’t see the point. But EG doesn’t have to be sorry as there are quite a few who don’t see EG’s points either so there is a balance achieved somewhere, I am sure. Almost sure. Possibly. I’m working out the odds that there is an equilibrium in all this somewhere out past the Andromeda Galaxy or maybe in the Implicate Order.
EG has better acolytes than Christ, that’s odds on. I wonder if Jesus would have been pleased if St Peter had gone all around the traps when asked if he knew JC, instead of simply denying it. What interpretations the theologists would have had to come up with. Maybe Peter should have tried the ‘name out of the unseen’ trick. Its a good one. It would have had those centurions scratching their heads that’s for sure. Chap 23 v.9 “Yeah, they did scratch their heads in wonderment and weleased Woger”
This mix up of ‘guess the commonest name’ and shove it into conversation even though irrelevant to the arguement, could so easily come unstuck if Joyanna’s maiden name was Zwiklovsky. If you are going to play the odds at 50/50 its not much of a fun time, but 10,426:1, would have been SO impressive. I might even have fallen down on my knees infront of EG myself and begged forgiveness.
EG, a simple apology would have done, even for inadvertently causing grief. Is it so hard? I am a little incredulous with the guesswork you offer but then who knows what pops into view in the great unseen.
An arguement has been put forward that EG is trying hard to form a sound MRA set of principles that aid men achieve some status. I admire EG. I have said it before and may even say it again sometimes. He is busy generating much thoughful consideration of men and woman in the world, much of it positive. That doesn’t mean he is always right in everything of course. Few of us get there every time. His lists of things to do – as other’s lists do, do help men. Its a painful process, getting to the start line. But is this an excuse for his attack?
But folks. I am sorry that hardly anyone has stuck to the point. What of YOUR privacy here?
Mike has come in for unfair and unreasonable stick in some of the posts here. This is the Mike who has carefully maintained the privacy of every one of us, while enabling a full and free flow of good conversation. He has not seen the need to disclose odd bits of personal info about any of us, despite having cupboards bulging with the stuff.
And he expects us to be adult about it. He expects us to trust him. He hasn’t let any of us down. He demonstrates his trustworthyness – indeed his masculinity. Still he gets stick ! Astonishing. EG has let us down. Not a hanging offence, but offensive nevertheless. he wriggles like a worm on a hook. Not manly. Yet he is defended. Not astonishing. Sad.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
If Williams’s only number 10% of the population, then the odds would be 10%.
In effect if I rolled a 6 sided die, and hid the result behind my hand you would have a 16.6% chance of guessing correctly, even if you were only guessing between numbers 4,5,6, or only 5,6.
July 11th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Jackal, my analysis is based on the assumption that her name *is* Williams, as she claims. We take that as a given for the sake of argument. So if her name is Williams, then her chance of having that name is 100%.
If Williams is not her name, there’s no reason to believe he investigated her and came up with Williams.
July 11th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Interesting what you can find on the internet these days. Maybe this was all a comedy of errors.
It does seem strange with all of his postings about character and a godly path that EG would investigate somebody.
One last point, just because Williams is third in genealogy doesn’t mean that he had a 33% chance of getting it right. It would have depended upon Joyanna’s chance of HAVING that name. If Williams represents 10% of the surnames out there, he would have had a 10% chance of getting the bullseye.
Although Williams is still way more common then I woulda thought.
July 11th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Also, “williams” for “adams” would be understandable if you were tired and were reaching for the name in the back of your mind.
I am satisfied that no ill was intended.
I also think there’s an element of synchronicity at work.
July 11th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
If this were a court of law, I think that 10 or 20% would probably constitute reasonable doubt, and the accused, EG, would be set free. If we don’t know for sure her name really is Williams, then we have even more “reasonable doubt”. If it’s just his word against hers, there wouldn’t even be a trial in the first place.
July 11th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
In other words, if we assume that her name really is Williams, and if we were to guess her name, and if we took one of the top three names at random, we would have a 33% chance of guessing it correctly. If we took one of the top 5 names at random, we would have a 20% chance of guessing it correctly. If we took one of the top 10 names at random (equally weighted to make the math simpler) we would have a 10% change of guessing correctly. Still not bad odds. So I think we should give EG the benefit of the doubt.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
So, if you were going to guess someone’s name, your first three guesses should be, in order, Smith, Johnson, and Williams. These are ranked 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
So EG’s claim is not as improbable as it sounds.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
According to this site, Williams is the third most common surname in the USA. It beats out Jones, Brown, and Davis.
http://genealogy.about.com/library/weekly/aa_common_surnames.htm
July 11th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
I’ve reached a spiritual high from all this enlightenment..thank you mike for holding this forum for I believe it to be a most profound experience…
casting off the shackles of psychological castration is an amasingly liberateing experience…I recommend it to all!!!
and jackal…the good women who want to help us should and do understand some men are quite torn up (and at times express it)about the injustices that have come upon them..
July 11th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Synchronicity: Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events which occur in a meaningful manner, but which are causally inexplicable to the person or persons experiencing them. The events would also have to suggest some underlying pattern in order to satisfy the definition of synchronicity as originally developed by Swiss psychologist Carl Jung.
Carl Jung coined the word to describe what he called “temporally coincident occurrences of acausal events.” Jung variously described synchronicity as an “‘acausal connecting principle’” (i.e. a pattern of connection that cannot be explained by direct causality), “meaningful coincidence” and “acausal parallelism”. Jung introduced the concept in his 1952 paper “Synchronicity — An Acausal Connecting Principle”, though he had been considering the concept for almost thirty years.[1]
It differs from mere coincidence in that synchronicity implies not just a happenstance, but an underlying pattern or dynamic expressed through meaningful relationships or events.
It was a principle that Jung felt encompassed his concepts of archetypes and the collective unconscious [2], in that it was descriptive of a governing dynamic that underlay the whole of human experience and history — social, emotional, psychological, and spiritual.
Jung believed that many experiences perceived as coincidence were not merely due to chance but, instead, suggested the manifestation of parallel events or circumstances reflecting this governing dynamic. [3]
One of Jung’s favourite quotes on Synchronicity was from Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll, in which the White Queen says to Alice: “It’s a poor sort of memory that only works backwards”. [4]
Events that happen which appear at first to be coincidence but are later found to be causally related are termed incoincident.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
July 11th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
I just finished skimming all of the posts. This is the first time I perused this thread.
Interestingly, the chance that Joyanna was lying about her last name never entered my head.
Now that Scott mentions it, it would be easy to see the motive. Joyanna would have a an ethical club to beat the crap out of EG with: that he investigated her. The previous 50 posts prove that the motive would have merit.
Like sgt Schultz “I know nothing!”. But, I do have suspicions. I have seen Joyanna ‘taking it on the chin’ on this website before. From what I have seen she has enough salt in her personality to take a few hits without resorting to such a bizarre lie.
I think the odds that she would lie & falsely claim that Williams was her last name to give herself ammo is a long-shot.
It also seems like a long-shot that EQ would “guess” her last name. Williams seems like it should be 7th or so in most common names behind Jones and Smith and several others I can’t think of right now.
If I were to lay the odds out it would be thusly:
1.5% Joyanna falsely claimed Williams to be her last name, 6% EG randomly tossed in Williams, and 92.5% chance well that EG arrived at the name Williams by something other than random chance–and that Williams is Joyanna’s last name.
Whatever the truth, it won’t be solved here & now.
Moving on to different fodder:
What’s odd is that I’m seeing a lot of posts about “don’t apologize to women they got us in this situation” and a lot of “we don’t need women’s help” to fix the injustices men face.
You people sound like a crotchety old black man talking about “trusting whitey.” Or worst you’re starting to sound like feminists bitching about men.
The simple matter is that if EG investigated Joyanna, he does owe her an apology. And that’s not chivalry, it’s respect. Joyanna has taken some rough hits squarely on the chin and has earned my respect.
Isn’t the battle cry of MRA’s that it shouldn’t matter what’s between your legs to be a parent? Why should it matter now? If Joyanna has been wronged she deserves an apology same as anybody.
And quite frankly, we DO need women’s help to fight these injustices. A few months back I saw Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream speech” at the reflecting pool.
There was a TON of whites in the crowd. Why? Because they were kind-hearted people who realized that blacks were facing true oppression.
How many whites do you see at a Louis-Farrakhan rally? Zero? How come–maybe because he’s a black bigot? Seeing the type of “women bad, men fantastic” drivel is making me wonder if some MRA’s will be leading us down the path to nowheres-ville just like Farrakhan did for the blacks.
The simple matter is that we live in very very selfish times. Nobody cares about anything other than what affects them.
Men are now the bottom class of society. It’s official. Like the black civil rights movement we need help from every person we can get.
You should be applauding women like Joyanna, Christina Hoff-Sommers, Cathy Young, the women at the IWF, and all of the sisters, aunts, moms, second wives, and paternal-side grandma’s who make up nearly half of the men’s rights movement and fight for the men in their life.
Without them we wouldn’t have had even nearly the mild successes we have had. Jeez you’re giving the title MRA a bad smell.
July 11th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Verbiage will be purged for the greater good.
July 11th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
OMG! The Irony, the absurdity of it all!
The best entertainment ever!
This must be why agreed to come to Earth, to be front row on this one!
Oh I am still laughing!
I never would have bet on it, but I sure would have been disappointed to to have seen all of this for myself.
I am glad that so many men now not only get EG’s point, but gauging their reactions to all of this, they get my point and wonder why there is such belligerent resistance to observations of a literally Impoverished Old Man who cares about Men seeing themselves for what they are, when they will never be in a position to make any impact in his life…short of satisfaction in seeing us on the road to natural balance and peace.
It pains me to see Elder making errors (which I discounted when I read “Williams“), trying to light the wrong burner, falling down racing for a bus and breaking his arm.
A man does not live forever, and so many live to never see the fruits of their hopes and ideas.
Other men never get to meet that man whose ideas wind up shaping their world.
Because, a Man does not live forever.
In his sunset years, all he knows is ignored by those rushing past thinking they know the way, making his prior mistakes.
Honor your Elders, do not attack them children were once taught.
Consume their words, give them time to root in your thought.
I did, even though I thought him a crazy old man.
Turns out he was the only sane message I found. Consistent, principled, foundational.
That is a leader of MEN. Because men do not want to be told everything, they follow a WAY a path, not a program. Because the world’s obstacles and occurrences are not certain.
So why then…why have the words spoken by a man you would dismiss as a crazy fool if you passed him on the street have incurred so much wrath? So much straining at the gnat (the exception) as Jesus condemned the Pharisees and Sadducees for?
What has been gained by the straining and second guessing?
I see what.
That G-D exists and still rules in the affairs of Men and Women.
That those who abandon and refuse return to principles behave unprincipled, then they reap the reward.
Here is all the evidence we need.
Perhaps this is the end of the degeneration of comments?
I do not know.
I know a couple of things, those who I do not think can teach me anything I have been happier not reading or commenting.
Those who are trying to teach me something make me ask more questions about their words.
I am comfortable with that, now that I found the character of a leader here.