[George M. Middius]

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[ScottW]

George M. Middius wrote:
I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

I find it amusing that you and ssshhhh consistently misrepresent
me, reference eloquent quotes which actually contradict your
position.....and then blame me.

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

"It is by a multitude of such considerations, each in itself trifling,
but all together weighty, that the framers of policy can alone divine
what is practicable and therefore wise. The imputation of inconsistency
is one to which every sound politician and every honest thinker must
sooner or later subject himself."

Sssshhhh is the one demanding consistency irrespective of the trifling
detail.

I have consistently said we do what we can in the circumstances.

Thanks for the quote....good stuff.

ScottW

[paul packer]

On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:56:40 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:




I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

What numbers?

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

What numbers?

You're doddering, paul.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
George M. Middius wrote:
I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

I find it amusing that you and ssshhhh consistently misrepresent
me, reference eloquent quotes which actually contradict your
position.....and then blame me.

LOL! Learn to read, toopid. What George posted *reinforces* my
position.

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Shhh! tried to make a situation that did not involve Muslims to see if
your passionately-held belief that an attack was warranted held to
other circumstances. You know, the logic behind your emotion.

"It is by a multitude of such considerations, each in itself trifling,
but all together weighty, that the framers of policy can alone divine
what is practicable and therefore wise. The imputation of inconsistency
is one to which every sound politician and every honest thinker must
sooner or later subject himself."

Sssshhhh is the one demanding consistency irrespective of the trifling
detail.

Um, no, toopid. Backwards, and all of that... again.

Shhhh! is the one that you give **** to because he changed his mind,
after great reflection, and retired from the military. BTW, toopid,
Shhhh! is also the one who has been well-trained in making and
assessing *assumptions* (propositions [triflings] made which contribute
to the wise decision or policy which do not have hard evidence to
support them).

Remember? We had a big discussion of assumptions when we discussed
military planning some time ago. (IIRC, you, of course, disagreed. RIP
& etc. & etc.)

What Shhhh! is after are what truths and logic are behind your (and
others with similarly intolerant views) absolute certainty about
committing the military, fighting Muslims, banning immigration, killing
people, and so on, and divining the inconsistencies that necessarily
follow from these 'truths' and 'logic' to arrive at a proper wise
conclusion based on something other than emotional appeal. You know,
like finding out what assumptions that you make (as making them are
inevitable) and testing them to see if they make sense.

Each 'trifling' (proposition) must be carefully considered to come up
with the 'weighty whole' (wise conclusion or decision). And you can't
do that by pulling stuff out of your ass, or going with 'what you
believe to be the case' or emotional appeal.

A point too fine for you, perhaps? That's my conclusion at this point,
since you've danced away from the topic every time that I've asked you
a question.

As an example, Rep. Goode says that Rep. Ellison's election could
create great harm to our Constitution, and that it is the start of our
conversion to Sharia, etc. I find fault with that assumption. i do not
understand the logic behind a statement like this. If you agree with
it, I'd like to hear why. Perhaps I'm missing something.

I have consistently said we do what we can in the circumstances.

i.e., pull stuff out of your ass.

Thanks for the quote....good stuff.

Yes, it was. Too bad you misunderstood its intent.

Here, here's a good quote from Bertrand Russell:

"The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no
good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder's
lack of rational conviction."

As another example, I have tried to find out from you what truths
(rational convictions) make it OK for you to condone killing people.
You are so adamant, and so completely sure, that there are
circumstances (other than where someone is physically attacked, a la
Pearl Harbor) that make committing our military to go forth and kill
citizens of other nations OK (ILO other options), or to accept that,
e.g., Ethiopia has a right to attack people in another country when it
had not been attacked. I have asked you about this several times, in
several forms. Yet, you have failed to address this very basic question
even once.

Passion is great in the bedroom, toopid. I hope that you and your wife
still have some. Emotional appeals are what induce people to give money
to charities. But they are not a very sound way to make national
policy, or to decide to commit the military, or to decide to kill
someone, don't you agree?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
paul packer said:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference..)

What numbers?

You're doddering, paul.

The numbers are small. Perhaps he just needs glasses.

[paul packer]

On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 21:10:04 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

What numbers?

You're doddering, paul.

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

[paul packer]

On 4 Jan 2007 19:05:41 -0800, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:


George M. Middius wrote:
paul packer said:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part=
of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied ev=
en
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences. So I'm sure you'll quit reading before finishing the first
paragraph.

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like y=
ou can
be found in =B6 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference=
.)

What numbers?

You're doddering, paul.

The numbers are small. Perhaps he just needs glasses.

Just spotted them now. I was looking for a clear index down the side
of the page (right margin), not tiny, nearly invisible numbers at the
end of (some) sentences. Geez!

[paul packer]

On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:56:40 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences.

"Perhaps the best forcing-house of robust individuality would be where
public opinion is inclined to be most overbearing, as he must be of
heroic temper who should walk along Piccadilly at the height of the
season in a soft hat."

You're not kidding, George.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

paul packer wrote:

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

PS: in proper English, there's no "u" in "Humor."

Are you speaking some gutter dialect?

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

What numbers?

You're doddering, paul.

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

They're in the right margin. Dodder, dodder, dodder. That "old and feeble"
excuse is a boomerang for you. (Somebody said the numbers are small, but I
doubt they're too small to see. If you're using IE, you can disable relative
font sizing so most text appears "normal" size.)




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences.

"Perhaps the best forcing-house of robust individuality would be where
public opinion is inclined to be most overbearing, as he must be of
heroic temper who should walk along Piccadilly at the height of the
season in a soft hat."

You're not kidding, George.

Agreed.™ LOt"S.™

I have no idea what that excerpt meant. Do you?




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

PS: in proper English, there's no "u" in "Humor."

The Usenet spel-flayme law evinces its inevitability yet again....

Next, class, we'll learn to count all the way up to 2! Yay!





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

duh-Scottie whined:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

I find it amusing that you and ssshhhh consistently misrepresent
me, reference eloquent quotes which actually contradict your
position.....and then blame me.

Your reading comprehension disability is laying you low again, Scooter.

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Interesting response. It's mostly a nonsequitur, partly a troll, and
partly further evidence of your intractable stupidity.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".







--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.

[ScottW]

George M. Middius wrote:
duh-Scottie whined:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

I find it amusing that you and ssshhhh consistently misrepresent
me, reference eloquent quotes which actually contradict your
position.....and then blame me.

Your reading comprehension disability is laying you low again, Scooter.

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Interesting response. It's mostly a nonsequitur, partly a troll, and
partly further evidence of your intractable stupidity.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

Repeatedly requiring corrections, failing to follow fact checking
policy, editors denial as their first response to complaints and
refusing to retract denial in the face of the facts......is bad.

The fact that the ombudsman is the source of these revelations doesn't
alter their
existance.

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Yapper bellows his epochal ignorance to the entire world.

Interesting response. It's mostly a nonsequitur, partly a troll, and
partly further evidence of your intractable stupidity.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

Repeatedly requiring corrections, failing to follow fact checking
policy, editors denial as their first response to complaints and
refusing to retract denial in the face of the facts......is bad.

Then why aren't you criticizing every newspaper in the country? Are you
aware of the New York Post's or the Washington Times' "fact checking
policies"? Are their "policies" more lax or more rigorous than the
NYTimes' policy?

The fact that the ombudsman is the source of these revelations doesn't
alter their existance[sic].

Really, Scottie, this is getting tedious. Two or three other posters have
smacked you in the face with the gaping holes in your "logic", and still
you repeat the same discredited bull****. After all these embarassments,
don't you think it's time to seriously consider the possibility that
there's something wrong with your "thought" processes?








--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.

[ScottW]

George M. Middius wrote:
Yapper bellows his epochal ignorance to the entire world.

Interesting response. It's mostly a nonsequitur, partly a troll, and
partly further evidence of your intractable stupidity.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

Repeatedly requiring corrections, failing to follow fact checking
policy, editors denial as their first response to complaints and
refusing to retract denial in the face of the facts......is bad.

Then why aren't you criticizing every newspaper in the country?

When I find glaring evidence of epidemic agenda driven error....
I will.

Are you
aware of the New York Post's or the Washington Times' "fact checking
policies"? Are their "policies" more lax or more rigorous than the
NYTimes' policy?

I don't know...do have evidence they don't follow their policy?
Has it resulted in gross errors in reporting?


The fact that the ombudsman is the source of these revelations doesn't
alter their existance[sic].

Really, Scottie, this is getting tedious. Two or three other posters have
smacked you in the face with the gaping holes in your "logic", and still
you repeat the same discredited bull****.

I didn't know you were such a strong believer in confession
and redemption George. But...given your personna, I suppose it
serves you well.

ScottW

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

PS: in proper English, there's no "u" in "Humor."

The Usenet spel-flayme law evinces its inevitability yet again....

Next, class, we'll learn to count all the way up to 2! Yay!

LOL

No, I actually just really enjoy giving Brits and Aussies a hard
time....

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
paul packer said:

As you know, Lowell lived during a period when intellectuals relied even
more heavily than today on complex thoughts cast in even more complex
sentences.

"Perhaps the best forcing-house of robust individuality would be where
public opinion is inclined to be most overbearing, as he must be of
heroic temper who should walk along Piccadilly at the height of the
season in a soft hat."

You're not kidding, George.

Agreed.„¢ LOt"S.„¢

I have no idea what that excerpt meant. Do you?

A possible read of it:

Rather than 'fitting in,' a test of one's individuality is to run
counter to the strong opinions of the masses. The 'soft hat' thing
appears to me to refer to a situation where a tophat would be called
for and expected by public opinion.

Lincoln had to face some strong public opposition to his anti-slavery
views, but he stuck with them.

My read in today's parlance might be, "toopid could show how much of a
rugged individualist he is and also display his herioc temper by
wearing his shoes, and his "Get Jesus Now, Ask Me How!" t-shirt, into
the mosque at Mecca."

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
duh-Scottie whined:

I ran across a pithy quote by J.R. Lowell today. Turns out it was part of an
essay on Abraham Lincoln: http://www.bartleby.com/28/16.html

Nevertheless, the excerpt I heard that is apposite to boneheads like you can
be found in ¶ 16. (The numbers in the right margin are for reference.)

I find it amusing that you and ssshhhh consistently misrepresent
me, reference eloquent quotes which actually contradict your
position.....and then blame me.

Your reading comprehension disability is laying you low again, Scooter.

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Interesting response. It's mostly a nonsequitur, partly a troll, and
partly further evidence of your intractable stupidity.

As are most of toopid's posts...

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

I disagree with this approach. toopid veers off-topic too much as it
is.

Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

As you can see, toopid is already careening all over the place. Is an
inability to stay focused a symptom of Asperger's, or is it just plain
old stupidity?

[paul packer]

On 5 Jan 2007 16:45:57 -0800, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:


George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

So humour me. Where are the numbers?

PS: in proper English, there's no "u" in "Humor."

The Usenet spel-flayme law evinces its inevitability yet again....

Next, class, we'll learn to count all the way up to 2! Yay!

LOL

No, I actually just really enjoy giving Brits and Aussies a hard
time....

And people named Scott?

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

I disagree with this approach. toopid veers off-topic too much as it is.

Nonsequitur is as nonsequitur does.

Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

As you can see, toopid is already careening all over the place. Is an
inability to stay focused a symptom of Asperger's, or is it just plain
old stupidity?

The Asperger's sufferers I know are completely unaware when somebody else is
laughing at them.



--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

My read in today's parlance might be, "toopid could show how much of a
rugged individualist he is and also display his herioc temper by
wearing his shoes, and his "Get Jesus Now, Ask Me How!" t-shirt, into
the mosque at Mecca."

You can buy this for Mrs. Scottie if you like:
http://www.geocities.com/glanbrok/RA...id_T_shirt.jpg




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[paul packer]

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 11:11:58 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:


Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

Good grief. That putz tries to radiate 100% sincerity.







--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

Anyway...explain how this quote is in support of the hypothetical
that sssshhhh tried to create comparing Ethiopia/Somalia to North
Korea.

Tell you what: I'll explain what you ask right after you explain why a
newspaper's ombudsman publishing public corrections of errors is "bad".

I disagree with this approach. toopid veers off-topic too much as it is.

Nonsequitur is as nonsequitur does.

Indeed.

Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

I note that when faced with logic, and when toopid gets backed into a
corner, he tends to get defensive and then he disappears for a while.

So I call that success...;-)

As you can see, toopid is already careening all over the place. Is an
inability to stay focused a symptom of Asperger's, or is it just plain
old stupidity?

The Asperger's sufferers I know are completely unaware when somebody else is
laughing at them.

That seems to fit, so it must just be a symptom.

[paul packer]

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 19:41:36 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



paul packer said:

Why not simply point out to him that you have to apply logic to form
good policy, and that what seems like a good idea at a certain point in
history (e.g. slavery or banning gay marriage) is not necessarily in
the long-term best interests of the nation or its people?

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

Good grief. That putz tries to radiate 100% sincerity.

Have you considered that he may be sincere?

Personally I think he makes a lot of sense. Of course, he doesn't
abuse and humiliate his guests, so that's something we have over him
here on RAO. :-)

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

Good grief. That putz tries to radiate 100% sincerity.

Have you considered that he may be sincere?

Have you heard any of his candid, off-the-record comments about his
shtick?

Personally I think he makes a lot of sense. Of course, he doesn't
abuse and humiliate his guests, so that's something we have over him
here on RAO. :-)

Is the light beginning to dawn on you? :-)







--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.

[paul packer]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 10:05:56 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



paul packer said:

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

Good grief. That putz tries to radiate 100% sincerity.

Have you considered that he may be sincere?

Have you heard any of his candid, off-the-record comments about his
shtick?

I haven't, but I'd be much enlightened if you quoted a couple.

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

How has that approach worked out for you? ;-)

So you've been watching Dr Phil, George. :-)

Good grief. That putz tries to radiate 100% sincerity.

Have you considered that he may be sincere?

Have you heard any of his candid, off-the-record comments about his
shtick?

I haven't, but I'd be much enlightened if you quoted a couple.

He revealed that his shtick is mostly a phoney act, that most of the time
he's laughing inwardly at the stupidity of those who ask his advice.

Now that we've come full circle, why did you bring up Dr. Phil in the
first place?






--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.