![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 38 to 62 of 73. Go back in thread:
Posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 11:31:34
In reply to Re: Politics not in itselt uncivil IMHO, posted by lil' jimi on April 18, 2003, at 1:29:22
Posted by lil' jimi on April 18, 2003, at 11:37:31
In reply to Re: Reagan the politician or Reagan the actor?. » Dinah, posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 11:30:04
Posted by leeran on April 18, 2003, at 11:40:20
In reply to Re: Dinah, you had me at hello. » leeran, posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 10:00:45
"But what if you hadn't already gotten to know me from my posts?"
I don't think political views "make" the person, so I don't think I could mentally shut out someone just because of their politics (or for their religious views). That said, it wouldn't matter if it was post #1, or post #1001.
I like these types of questions because they offer an opportunity to really think about what does (and doesn't) push my buttons.
As I sit here scratching my head on this I think some of the behaviors that raise the figurative fur on my back are as follows:
1) Agendas, hidden or loosely veiled, that are designed to manipulate others into some type of behavior ("innocent" agendas are fine, i.e. for meetings, etc.)
2) Actions that endanger the lives of others.
3) Bullying. (BUT, as an adult I can better understand that bullying is often rooted in poor self-esteem).
4) Phoniness (unless my b.s. meter is all out of whack of whack hormonally, I haven't seen any of that here on these boards).
I went through two unpleasant divorces (what divorce IS pleasant?) and those two experiences used up a couple of lifetimes worth of ire. It's so much easier to try to get along than to prove myself right or “win.”
(Note, to anyone going through a divorce or about to go through a divorce I, unfortunately, recommend keeping at least some of your anger intact so that you won't ever feel like kicking your butt later for giving in because you were too weary to fight anymore)
In the years since the divorces (and leaving my seventeen year job with the same entity, which was almost like another divorce) I've let go of a lot of my anger toward other people. It’s the anger toward myself that eats at my insides. LOL, I just realized, I’m too damned selfish to judge anyone else, it might take away precious time from judging myself! Proving once again that some of the greatest love affairs only involve one person.
Posted by lil' jimi on April 18, 2003, at 11:42:02
In reply to Re: Sorry to misattribute quotes (nm) » lil' jimi, posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 11:31:34
Wasn't ever a problem... made for a little confusion, but it's very like what i might do ..... no harm done at all.
thanks,
~ j
Posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 15:35:54
In reply to Re: Reagan the politician or Reagan the actor?. » Dinah, posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 11:30:04
You're good for me, Jane. :)
Reagan the politician of course. He was a way better president than he was an actor.
But surely if our friendship has flourished despite my fondness for Barry Manilow, it could withstand Ronald Reagan the actor. :))
Posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 20:28:10
In reply to Re: Reagan the politician or Reagan the actor?. » jane d, posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 15:35:54
> .... my fondness for Barry Manilow,
Dinah,
Have you posted over on the meds board about this? Somebody there may have some suggestions to help you with this. It's amazing what the right meds can do! I'd think something a little activating like Prozac or Lamictal. Perhaps clonazepam for any closet punk rockers hanging about and for the Deadheads.... Well, never mind about the Deadheads. They probably already have whatever they need. :)Jane
Now who was Barry Manilow?
Posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 21:55:32
In reply to Re: Reagan the politician or Reagan the actor?. » Dinah, posted by jane d on April 18, 2003, at 20:28:10
Posted by lil' jimi on April 18, 2003, at 22:17:41
In reply to Re: Everyone wants peace - real peace » justyourlaugh, posted by Dinah on April 17, 2003, at 22:24:01
> Different people just have different ideas about how to go about getting it.
>
> Did Chamberlain gain peace when Hitler chased him around the table?
>
> Is lack of war the same as peace?
>
> Peace at all costs?
>
> Continuing the sanctions that hurt the Iraqi people was better than ending a brutal dictatorship? Yeah, how about another ten years of oil for food? Not to mention torture and oppression.
>
> No easy answers.hi dinah,
how are you doing?
things are better for me now .... we got home okay.... i took my medication and then we all had a big nap.you know, justyourlaugh could have easily meant inner peace when she invoked "real peace" .... really decent arguments can be made that only with inner peace can any be real peace be achieved.... or jyl could have easily intended something more substantial, such as universal peace, which may be seen as either more "real", perhaps in some sense of more permanent, or perhaps as a form of ideal peace, although that may be less attainable.
but it doesn't matter .... because
...you have, in your post above, clearly implied that you have taken it as narrowily referring to peace in iraq ...
now, from my previous post, i said i want to uncloud my mind of my preconceptions (clear mind) and engage the personal affective aspect of your view (open heart) to appreciate you vision ... okay, my new friend?
the first thing my open heart seems to notice is that your message seems all ...mmmmm .... bristly-like ... besides being very abrupt .... it seems as if it is in response to some experiences which may have put you on the defensive?... maybe?
anywho, all that's just my measure of your offerings' more superficial style points and not really important, except as a beginning for me trying to engage your vision here.
so you want to talk about iraq, okay?... okay, but neither i nor jyl nor tim robbins' speech mentioned iraq, but if you, my friend, want to talk about iraq, then i'm going to open my heart to your vision ....so
"> Different people just have different ideas about how to go about getting it. "
okay! we can agree... although this should be classified as an inescapable truism, but i take it this is your statement supporting a diversity of views... and we agree about that too.
but from here things get more complicated for me ... your vision is not so clear to me here..... so i will be asking for some clarification(s), okay?
one the one hand we have your ww2 nazi germany analogy:
"> Did Chamberlain gain peace when Hitler chased him around the table?
> Is lack of war the same as peace?
> Peace at all costs?"
where we have your rhetorical questions to which the answers are all unequivocally, "no."yet on the opposite hand, we have:
"> Continuing the sanctions that hurt the Iraqi people was better than ending a brutal dictatorship? Yeah, how about another ten years of oil for food? Not to mention torture and oppression."
referring to the pre-gulf war 2 situation in iraq...then
"> No easy answers."
... where i don't think you really intend to be describing my reaction to your offerings, but that's how it strikes me..... however, allowing myself to extrapolate, my sense of this is, ....that it is to dismiss the possibility of solution immediacy.... which doesn't seem unreasonable....okay, please try to help me out here:
in your ww2 analogy, aren't you emphasizing the historical failure of appeasement against an intractable enemy, as in, "No giving in! No lettin' 'em off!";whereas, in your reference to the pre-iraq war situation you attack the un sanctions, and by extension the entire regime of international punitive efforts against iraq for gulf war 1.
so i'm getting a double vision of your view because we can either condemn whatever appeasement it is that you are denouncing or you may condemn the punishment the internationally imposed sanctions: do you feel we were being too hard on iraq with the sanctions Or were they getting off too lightly, ala some sweet-heart deal with some bambozzled neville chamberlian-like baffoon?
can you see that my problem here is that the combination of
defeat in gulf war 1;
food-for-oil;
no-fly zones with regular air strikes;
the weapon inspections;
nation-wide u-2 overflights;
along with the other international sanctions seem to be the opposite of appeasement?and another serious problem, for me, here, is the entire ww2 analogy: although hitler was a bad guy and saddam hussein was/is a bad guy, the parallels between pre-gulf war 2 iraq and our situation with nazi germany before entered ww2 are very thin.
germany had a series of unrelieved successes dominating europe with its fully operational war machine against no effective opposition.
iraq's military was seriously degraded by gulf war 1, had all of the above listed encumberances to re-building its capabilities, while 2/3 of the country had nato overflights and un inspectors searched for any signs of weapons development...
so the pre-gulf war 2 iraq does not make out as the implacable unrestrained nazi germany analog by any reasonable stretch... and as far as i recall there was no neville chamberlain coming to them to seek accommodation either .... unless we were to count bush 1's ending of gulf war 1
i'd ask if abandoning the ww2 analogy isn't for the best?
of course it hasn't been in dispute that mr. hussien regime was a brutal dictatorship, but that has not been any different than when we put him into power in the 70s, thank you donald rumsfeld and the bush 1 team..... and being a brutal dictatorship hasn't been sufficient cause for us to go to war until recently ... we have installed and supported brutal dictatorships more often than not, iran, indonesia, chile, guatemala come to mind... and if changing our past bad behavior was a goal then there should be consideration for the brutal dictatorships which pose more formidable threats to world peace, which iraq scarcely was, such as china or .... saudi arabia ...
so despite my attempts i have failed to engage the vision you have offered.... i apologize
would help me clear up these confusions, please?
your civil friend,
~ jim
Posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 23:02:36
In reply to Re: Everyone wants real peace » Dinah, posted by lil' jimi on April 18, 2003, at 22:17:41
>
> would help me clear up these confusions, please?
>
> your civil friend,
> ~ jimSorry, Jim. But my point was that this is a place I go to maintain relationships. The only place really that I have to do that.
I wasn't throwing down the gauntlet, or challenging you to a debate.
I wasn't intending to be bristly with JYL either. I'm just so tired of having to defend those things that are important to me, and I can't not do it.
I know you'll say that I should just not read.
I tend to think that I don't belong here or anywhere else. I can't do this sort of thing. It upsets me too much.
Posted by leeran on April 18, 2003, at 23:31:30
In reply to Re: Everyone wants real peace » lil' jimi, posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 23:02:36
"I tend to think that I don't belong here or anywhere else."
Forgive me if I'm intruding, but based on reading so many of your posts (present) and even some in the archives, my impression is that not only do you belong here, but you are very much needed and looked to for advice, goodwill and nonjudgemental support.
Just today I spent about thirty minutes looking up a few terms you used in one of your posts on one of the other boards and I realized that one of the terms could definitely apply to the way I look at the world (and I didn't even know it was something the psychiatric community viewed as "not normal").
The fact that you are so open about yourself is incredibly helpful to other people. I've always hopscotched around my "issues" and reading your posts has made me feel a bit more accepting of myself (and my baggage) after all these years! And I'm not just shining your apple!
Posted by lil' jimi on April 19, 2003, at 0:15:43
In reply to Re: Everyone wants real peace » lil' jimi, posted by Dinah on April 18, 2003, at 23:02:36
> >
> > would help me clear up these confusions, please?
> >
> > your civil friend,
> > ~ jim
>
> Sorry, Jim. But my point was that this is a place I go to maintain relationships. The only place really that I have to do that.
>
> I wasn't throwing down the gauntlet, or challenging you to a debate.
>
> I wasn't intending to be bristly with JYL either. I'm just so tired of having to defend those things that are important to me, and I can't not do it.
>
> I know you'll say that I should just not read.
>
> I tend to think that I don't belong here or anywhere else. I can't do this sort of thing. It upsets me too much.
>
>
dinah,then we simply cannot do this .... i will not abet you being so upset .... as much as i looked foward to the exchenge, i would not have you feel put upon .... i would very much like for you to feel like you belong here .... your absence would be a detriment to the whole babble community, you bring so much here .... babble could much more easily get along without me
i'm really panicky about you being unhappy .... i will not say that you should just not read .... if we do not feel like having to defend anything, that should be sufficient ..... especially in this forum ... especially between two friends
i hope you will except my apology .... i honestly thought that a gaunlet had been thrown down and that it would be safe to exchange views, even in the area of politics ..... i thought you had brought it up, because the issues i offered were more about free speech .... i would never want to inhibit your speech in any way
but i like bill clinton
and
jimi hendrix, in case you hadn't guessed.
love,
~ lil' jimip.s.
i remember all my life
raining down as cold as ice
shadow of a man
a face in the window
crying in the night
the night goes into
morning just another day
happy people pass my way
looking in their eyes
i see a memory
i never realized
how happy you made meoh, mandy, you came and you gave without taking .....
Posted by Dinah on April 19, 2003, at 9:55:31
In reply to Re: Everyone wants real peace » Dinah, posted by leeran on April 18, 2003, at 23:31:30
I already knew that from reading your other posts, but I just thought it needed saying.
This board is very good for me in some ways, but stirs up feelings that would otherwise not be stirred in my little bubble of a world. I was talking to my therapist yesterday about it. He currently is in favor of my participation on the board, but sometimes I wonder if he has in mind the extra fees my participation here generates. :)
I'm glad my openness here is helpful to you. I sometimes fear I am way too open. But that's me sort of, either way too closed or way too open.
Posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 14:09:47
In reply to Win without War (very long), posted by lil' jimi on April 17, 2003, at 16:07:50
above here somewhere, i posted:
> Opinions?
>
> Transcript of the speech given by Tim
> Robbins to the
> National Press Club in Washington DC on Tuesday, April 15, 2003.
>
> TIM ROBBINS: Thank you.
.......
<<Mr. Robbin's speech is on this thread above.>>
.......
> Event Date: April 15, 2003
> Event Name: Tim Robbins
> Details: Win Without Warhello again to all our posters ....
it's me again: "lil' jimi":
dissident, provocateur,
aggravator of this particular "civil unrest" .... (very Very civil!)((caution to all of our "too-sensitive-for-political-type-stuff-which-they-can't-agree-with" Babblers: PLEASE, please, PLuH-LEEZ,
DO NOT READ THIS!!!))(heh, heh .... like that's going to do any good!)
ah, that's better ... .. now that we're down to the-strong-of-neurotransmitter and reasonably adult-of-maturity, and it's just us folks here ..... can we ... message ?
i was just hoping that we could all social-like discuss the social experiences of what it's like to live in the social society that our Mr. Robbins is a-living in with us. To wit:
"This past weekend, Susan and I and the three kids went to Florida for a family reunion of sorts. Amidst the alcohol and the dancing, sugar-rushing children, there was, of course, talk of the war. And the most frightening thing about the weekend was the amount of times we were thanked for speaking out against the war because that individual speaking thought it unsafe to do so in their own community, in their own life.
Keep talking, they said; I haven't been able to open my mouth. "which i felt was the crux of his message (and my post).... and which, i felt, most of our responders didn't seem very responsive to ... very much, anyway.
anway ...
it is because i have felt this 'unsafety' about speaking out about these important things and that i have felt like i haven't been able "to open my mouth" .... that i'm starting to fear the consequences .... consequences like ... isn't there a penalty to pay for succumbing to what other's have called the "sedition of silence"?
and
"'Politics!'- schmolitics! ," i say .... how about just *freedom of speech* ? .... Oh, yeah, even *here* in our, oh-so, sacred Psycho-Social space.
now, if you have felt this or fear that and are willing to try this out with me and our pals, come on down!
and, if you are offended that i bring these issues up, then just please ignore me .... it is really easy .... everyone else does it all the time.
i promise to be real, Real civil-like.... honest!
to those easily-offended who are still reading this: I apologize, in advance .... and later too as the need's be ....
and as i wrote in the 1st instance:
> i thank you for your patience.
> Peace,
> ~ jim" .... same as it ever was... "
as i asked before, "Opinions?"
or experience
or inexperience
or poetry
or comedy
any other dang civil thing you got...(just no crying, okay? i'm really Not hurting anybody... really.)
peace,
~ jimp.s. i like "agreance" okay, but i dont' like them biscuit-whoever's tunes.
Posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 15:05:13
In reply to Re: Lose with War, posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 14:09:47
I'm not against the war but don't intend to defend my opinion as I need to conserve energy for arguing with my soon-to-be ex-husband. But as long as we're on the subject, I wanted to pass along the following information:
By law, employers of reservists are required to hold open their jobs when employees are called for active duty, but this is all that is required.
Reservists often suffer pay cuts and lose benefits
as a result of their absence.
Sears is voluntarily paying the difference in salary and maintaining all benefits, including health insurance and bonus programs, for reservist employees called to active duty. If this makes you more inclined to shop at Sears, find a manager and tell them why you decided to
spend your hard-earned dollars at their store.
The company needs and deserves positive feedback
for this policy.
-Gracie the Veteran
Posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 15:27:39
In reply to Everyone please take a moment to read, posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 15:05:13
hi gracie,
thank you .... "pay cuts"?... "lose benefits"? ....
(where is the public outrage?)
.... and i, incorrectly, thought that reservists had this protection, which they richly deserve ... i appreciate your enlightening me about this .... and a better reason to shop at sears and roebucks, besides that one's in my neighborhood and they sell some reeboks i like.
is there perhaps an online resource for supporting our reserves on this?
as i have said before, i support our armed forces and especially our veterans
(whose benefits were CUT (!) last week, i believe).thanks again!
supporting our troops,
~ jim
Posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 17:31:32
In reply to Everyone please take a moment to read, posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 15:05:13
"I need to conserve energy for arguing with my soon-to-be ex-husband"
Absolutely, Gracie! Hold your cards close and keep your eyes open. Don't settle for anything less than all you deserve.
My first husband "got to me" in a weak moment on or around April 15 (several years ago) and I was so desperate to "get it over with" that I ended up paying all of the income tax we owed and letting him have his 80 acre "hunting playground" for less than market value. I know all that sounds material (lol, vs. immaterial - but I mean material in the sense of materialistic, which is what I should have SAID), but in a way, it's MORE than material(istic) because it's how you end up feeling afterwards when the dust settles that's important.
My ex-husband played tug-of-war right down to the friggin' coasters and bottle stoppers. And the s.o.b. made off with about five years worth (or more) of my serotonin.
If you ever want to email me for divorce "pep talks" please feel free. :-)
Posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 18:16:17
In reply to Re: Everyone please take a moment to read » whiterabbit, posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 17:31:32
Posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 18:28:23
In reply to Re: Everyone please take a moment to read » whiterabbit, posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 17:31:32
And whatever you do, don't bail out :)
Your post about bailing really was a metaphor for life, at least for me.
I don't know how many times I have done things the hardest way possible because I just didn't KNOW any other way.
Note: Noa, I'm not saying you should have known the bail trick, I sure didn't! I'm just saying that I felt your "world weariness" when you described the bail moment, and then there was one of those "aha" moments when I read Gracie's post. I can get so overwhelmed over things like that. Stopped up drains/toilets. Ants. Leaky faucets. PIGEONS (that's my latest heartache). We have a pigeon that spends more time on our chaise lounge than I do.
Posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 19:27:22
In reply to I have a brand new b.b. gun if you need it ;-) » leeran, posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 18:28:23
So that's why you bought a BB gun! I might need to borrow that thang from you, a BB gun is perfect. I don't want to kill him, I need the money.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
-Gracie
Posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 19:57:24
In reply to Pigeons?, posted by whiterabbit on April 22, 2003, at 19:27:22
This is so funny. The other night when we bought the DANG THING I asked the salesperson if it is illegal to kill pigeons in California (please, PETA people, I'm sorry but I've tried everything, I truly have).
Afterwards, my husband said "I told you not to mention the reason for buying it to anyone! Do you think everyone wears a white collar?" LOL, guilty me. Already sentencing myself for a crime I haven't yet committed. AND HERE I AM CONFESSING ON A BOARD (my husband is right, I'm looking for world forgiveness).
I have killed a snake with a b.b. gun, and it was no easy task.
I only did it for my mother (oh yeah, it always comes back to her) because she has a horrid fear of snakes and this one was on her garage door - and it was back in another part of the country where kids get their first b.b. gun on their first birthday (do not say anything that could lead others to feel put-down, but I am not identifying what area of what country).
It took at least 50 - 100 b.b.'s (b.b.s?) because it (a) was dark (b) snakes are skinny (c) I'm not a good shot.
So, if it's a "snake in the grass" that 'yer needin' helpin' with, sorry, that "ain't" me - but if yer' lookin' to down a garage door snake, give me a jingle.
Lee
Posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 20:45:24
In reply to LOL, yes, THAT'S WHY! » whiterabbit, posted by leeran on April 22, 2003, at 19:57:24
hi grace and lee,
could maybe someone go get miller in on this ..... seems i "heard" her "say" something about her situation and maybe she could use some of y'all's advice .... or support for her parallels to grace's issue here
(i'm an ol' fashioned husband... "for richer or poorer and in sickness and in health" means something to me... going on 17 years .... and my sweet wife is my saving angel.... many times over.)
just don't shoot me with no BB gun! ... heck, i'm on y'all's side!
i'm from/in texas ....(land of BB guns for 6yr-olds?)..... bad husbands? ..... with younger women?...... Get a Rope !
Posted by wendy b. on April 23, 2003, at 6:25:04
In reply to Re: Lose with War, posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 14:09:47
> above here somewhere, i posted:
> > Opinions?hey, jimi, another person in favor of the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' here... i appreciated your post, and think Robbins and Sarandon are brave to do what they do... evidently Sarandon said on the tv show "The View" that she was disappointed in Hillary for voting for war... since Hillary is MY senator, i also think: well, what the hell is she on about? i voted for her as a person who had a reasonably liberal stance on issues important to me... now what? who else is there going to be to vote for next time? the green party candidate who has no chance of winning? and then feel like i'm just flushing my vote down the proverbial toilet?
> ((caution to all of our "too-sensitive-for-political-type-stuff-which-they-can't-agree-with" Babblers: PLEASE, please, PLuH-LEEZ,
> DO NOT READ THIS!!!))good boy, jimi.
> (heh, heh .... like that's going to do any good!)"well, at least he remains realistic, not totally devoid of a connection to reality..." said his shrink.
> ah, that's better ... .. now that we're down to the-strong-of-neurotransmitter and reasonably adult-of-maturity, and it's just us folks here ..... can we ... message ?i will send you some really great web sites about freedom of speech (since this is what i think we're talking about here, right?) i have to go to work, fight off the creditors (bow to shar here), and cart daughter to various activities after school, but i will check in later...
thanks for sticking to your guns... (no, wait! bad turn of phrase)...
wendy
Posted by leeran on April 23, 2003, at 11:28:22
In reply to Re: Lose with War, posted by lil' jimi on April 22, 2003, at 14:09:47
"it is because i have felt this 'unsafety' about speaking out about these important things"
--------------------------------------------------Jimi,
Boy, do I have a website for you . . .
Do you ever visit www.rumormillnews.com? Somehow, I think you might find it of interest.
If you go to the website, scroll down to the little blue box that says "reading room" (expect pop-ups, darn it), and click on the link.
You have to be an "agent" to post there (note: I am NOT an agent, nor have I ever desired to be one for myriad reasons), but there's some interesting reading from different points of view.
You don't need Visa or Mastercard there, but you do need a large grain of salt.
I enjoy the different perspectives. Some threads I simply ignore, and others I find quite intriguing. An added feature is that you can see how many times each message has been viewed.
If you go, let me know what you think.
Lee
p.s. I read a book a few years ago (very, very controversial) that left me questioning everything. Soon after reading that book I found RumorMillNews and a few other similar websites. I always start out at www.drudgereport.com but depending on the current political/national/world situation I will give these other sites a quick look to see what spin they're putting on things. Also, have you seen "Wag the Dog?"
Another P.S. - This post is about the extent of it for me as far as the subject of politics goes. My husband and I talk about it constantly (I think I wear on his nerves), plus, I get my political internet jollies from three websites (two of which I mentioned above). I started Lexapro again Monday so I'm hoping that little 1/2 pill will help me stop obsessing about what's going to happen and take a more an "I ultimately have no control over it" attitude.
Okay, gotta run, Jimi. I'm leaving this room full of mirrors because I hear my train a comin'. I need to get ready to take my husband to work - not in a purple haze for a change - will undoubtedly hit some crosstown traffic. I'll take a stab at make up but still won't be a foxy lady. Manic depression?
Posted by lil' jimi on April 23, 2003, at 12:17:52
In reply to Re: Lose with War » lil' jimi, posted by wendy b. on April 23, 2003, at 6:25:04
hi wendy!
thanks for your post!> > above here somewhere, i posted:
> > > Opinions?
>
> hey, jimi, another person in favor of the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' here...
glad to have you! ....
and as much as i admire the idealism embodied in the vision of a classless proletarian utopia, i'll want to abjure the implications of the 'dictatorship', what with being for free speech and all,
and if only to avoid possibly being over-intrepreted/misconstrued by our fellow posters .....
but i know what you mean and i appreciate the comradery... and your friendly spirit ....> i appreciated your post, and think Robbins and Sarandon are brave to do what they do...
evidently Sarandon said on the tv show "The View" that she was disappointed in Hillary for voting for war... since Hillary is MY senator, i also think: well, what the hell is she on about? i voted for her as a person who had a reasonably liberal stance on issues important to me... now what? who else is there going to be to vote for next time? the green party candidate who has no chance of winning? and then feel like i'm just flushing my vote down the proverbial toilet?
>
you have touched on one of the sensitive points, for me anyway, among our Loyal Oppostion and you have expressed my dismay most eloquently, absent the natural total-screaming-outrage reaction i'm inclined to ... sadly, senator clinton's husband is no help in this regard either, but she is Your senator .... so perhaps you should let her know how you feel .... my senators do not care how i feel, but i tell them anyway .... i'd be telling senator clinton a lot more , because i'd expect a lot more, if she was representing me ... where does schumer stand?..... unfortunately, this hillary-syndrome has afflicted a lot of the Loyal Opposition..: questionable loyalty and not enough opposition.and thanks also for phrasing exactly my sentiments about the right's stalking-horse, who call themselves 'greens' ...
>
> > ((caution to all of our "too-sensitive-for-political-type-stuff-which-they-can't-agree-with" Babblers: PLEASE, please, PLuH-LEEZ,
> > DO NOT READ THIS!!!))
>
> good boy, jimi.
>
don't think i overdid that? ... 'ppreciate the head pat!>
> > (heh, heh .... like that's going to do any good!)
>
> "well, at least he remains realistic, not totally devoid of a connection to reality..." said his shrink.
>
heh, well, i try. Thanks for the compliment ... my Lexapro should get some credit ... maybe>
> > ah, that's better ... .. now that we're down to the-strong-of-neurotransmitter and reasonably adult-of-maturity, and it's just us folks here ..... can we ... message ?
>
> i will send you some really great web sites about freedom of speech (since this is what i think we're talking about here, right?)Please do! and thank you! .... and yes, freedom of speech! .... which implies anyone may talk about anything, here or elsewhere .... BB guns, faithless husbands, pigeons, included ....no harm done .... it's all good.
> i have to go to work, fight off the creditors (bow to shar here), and cart daughter to various activities after school, but i will check in later...
>
blessings upon you and all the working moms .... they have got each of us trapped on these personal-finance treadmills .... hang in there .... our one and only is just 4.> thanks for sticking to your guns... (no, wait! bad turn of phrase)...
>
> wendymy thanks to you (and i can let 'em misconstrue that one .... maybe?)
peace,
~ jim
Posted by lil' jimi on April 23, 2003, at 12:53:56
In reply to Re: Lose with War » lil' jimi, posted by leeran on April 23, 2003, at 11:28:22
hi lee!
wow! .... what a great post, you poster, you! ...
big thanks!
now i've got a research project you've given me.... terrific! .... i'll be sure to get back to you when i've checked out these sites .... i have the salt ready!questions for you:
what book was it?
what's the 3rd site?lee,
you
*totally*
Rock!!!!thanks again,
~ lil' jimip.s. how did you do on lexapro before? ... so you're starting at 5mg since monday? .... day 3 at 5mg was rough for me ... take care!
extra p.s. how about a support message board for spouses/significant others of us babblers?... i'm imaginning what we might learn .... especially if ours were to compare notes!
to you: "....fly on, little wing ....." ..~ jim
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.