WordWolf

When I was in college- and for a few years after- I was involved with a SERVICE fraternity. Instead of a house and drinking games, there were service projects and showing up to work on things. It can be argued that it looked good on a resumè, that it provided free leadership training, and so on, so that it was useful to the member. (In fact, I argued that Christians might find it useful to show up and get some of the experience.) Either way, there was a lot of community service and work with other people. In fact, some people contacted us to work with them every year because we knew what we were doing. I've handled phones for PBS telethons, marshalled walkathons, worked on rebuilding a building, worked on Earth Day and Comic Relief (both in Manhattan, both in the same year), and other service projects. Yes, it's amazing how the skills are transferable. I remember once showing up at an assigned spot for a walkathon. We got to the corner before the officials assigned to the corner. I looked at the materials, and at my fraternity brothers, and mumbled something as I organized who was working with what. A few minutes after we arrived, the official arrived, saw the corner all ready, and left us to run it. They gave us some quick instructions, announcements to make at that spot, and handed me a bullhorn before going to the next corner- which was completely disorganized. (Looking back, I'm amazed they figured out who to hand the bullhorn to when we were all dressed similarly.) All of that being said, I kept that as college life and social life. Around that time, NY (state and city) had, in effect, been kicked out by lcm. That's when he'd demanded an oath of loyalty to himself PERSONALLY to follow him BLINDLY and without qualification (in both meanings of the word.) The entire staff of the state refused and were fired en masse. We were told they were all serving their own bellies and to ignore them, by lcm. But, we'd worked with these people and knew that was a lie, and we couldn't say the same about lcm. In fact, he was slated to show up locally once and he wussed out. So, 80% or more of the state walked en masse with the staff. Not that long into the process (a few years), one of the area coordinators started mentioning to me an idea that had been trickling down- the idea of public service, of volunteering for local events that needed help. He sounded like this was the most shocking idea he'd heard in some time. (Then again, he'd been hearing from HQ until recently, and now only from upstate for a few years, so a few new ideas were circulating.) I offered my counsel, and told him I'd been doing that for years at college and had accumulated over 100 service hours, so I had experience. (Minimum of 20 hours per semester, 2 semesters per year, 4-5 years at the time...) He gave me a look like I'd just claimed to have invented the idea of public service, and never uttered a peep to me about it again, let alone asked me for practical advice. Even for ex-twi, the idea that public service outside of official channels could work has ranged, at times, between surprise, shock, and outright disbelief. Now, it's decades later, and I'd expect the idea isn't so shocking anymore.

I think it's quite telling what happened here. I brought something up. The direct response was to insult me and change the subject. That's right out of the vpw apologist playbook. Apparently, it signals an attempt to hide something uncomfortable that's indefensible. (It has been, so far.) So, whatever the truth is about why he's hanging out with them, he's uncomfortable about the reason and can't actually defend it. His conscience bothers him about it. I find that fascinating. Next is either ignoring this, or- more likely- yet another insult that bypasses the subject.

"It says here to 'Leave no stone unturned.' "

With all of us watching different shows if we watch shows nowadays, it's getting hard to come up with something different....

Yes. I assume "Yogurt" was the giveaway here.

I doubt it will impress anyone, but in agreement with Twinky's post about alternate news sources, I make a point of that. I generally will check through CNN, Fox, BBC AND Reuters. When looking at a story about Europe or points east, I may also check Al Jazeera and Euronews. I often find it interesting to see what they DON'T cover, or mention in passing. Oh, and the last time I saw all of them covering almost the same thing (Al-J was a bit more general) was the funeral of Queen Elizabeth. In fact, I switched between watching one and another at different points if one's coverage started to stall.

I'm just curious what motivates someone to hang out in groups of young folk and invoke the names and work of others. It sounds familiar somehow, as if I've heard it before.

Albert Einstein Professor Max Krassman Tomas de Torquemada Dr Richard Harpo Thorndyke Moses Professor Van Helsing Dr Frederick Bronski Goddard Bolt Victor Frankenstein Tikon Bruner Adolf Hitler Yogurt Mr Welling

If he can follow Twinky's advice, he might find this thread MOST useful.

I have no idea about this other book someone mentioned. I'd never heard of it until now. As for the "Christian Etiquette" book, I've heard of it but never read it. I can only SPECULATE about its contents, so I'd wait until someone who still has the book, or at least has READ the book, to comment. I do remember asking once about the "stand up" business and nobody mentioned that book, so it might not be there. (Or anyone who read it may not have replied.)

The main problem with Galileo wasn't his science. He was a legit scientist. Galileo's problem was that Galileo Galilei was also a FANATIC. (No, I'm not saying he should have been tried or anything, but he should have been more sensible for his time.) Before Galileo wrote his books, others had written on the same subjects. They wrote to other scholars, and did so in Latin- which all scholars knew up into the dawn of the 20th century. The RCC ignored them. Galileo knew that. Rather than do something similar, Galileo set out specifically to set off the RCC. He wrote in the common language, and targeted more of the average person, deliberately drawing attention to himself. (Frankly, he could have been a bit more subtle and still been ignored.) When he started getting some verbal warnings about what he was doing and how it was going to end up backfiring on him, Galileo doubled down. He wrote in the common language again, and this time, he made sure to include a rather obvious strawman in his book that was an expy for the current Pope! After that, the RCC kinda HAD to take notice. He also was sentenced to a house arrest- so, rather dump him in prison for some years, they sentenced him to having to live in his own home. As sentences go, that's not so severe. I mean, I might be sentenced to that, and carrying out that sentence, and not even notice it. None of that means I agree that there should have been a trial over science, but Galileo was spoiling for a fight, and antagonized the sitting Pope. If it was JUST about the science, he would have been a bit more sensible about it. He could have reached more common people, also.

She also wrote some booklet on etiquette or something, which became de rigeur at hq a long time ago, which is why her name came up now.

That's all good advice. I don't know if he can bring himself to follow it. He's tied his view of self up with his methods, and concluded that the ends justified the means decades ago. Challenging that after decades? We'll see, but I know which way to bet.

I'll need a few hours.

I'm assuming his usual, which is this is a FREE POST.

We've been asking for that from Mike since he first started posting. Good luck with that. Leopard, spots. He's never going to define anything. When he gets caught with another mistake, he'll claim we misunderstood him and he never actually made a mistake. Leopard, spots.

Everybody can at least THINK they're a genius about SOMETHING.

There's either a disconnect with what was presented, or who it was presented to. It would not surprise me to find out there WAS no such group.

That's why there's always going to be that disconnect. There's a discrepancy between what words and terms mean in regular usage and what they mean in his mind.

Everybody except Mike got my point. And publishing unofficially still publishes.

The problem is, if you say "Sometimes you don't consider contrary evidence", then every single instance will be the exception, and you'll NEVER consider the evidence you don't like. The truth will survive scrutiny. It can survive the fire when baser elements burn up.

Albert Einstein Professor Max Krassman Tomas de Torquemada Dr Richard H. Thorndyke Moses Professor Van Helsing Professor Van Helsing Dr Frederick Bronski Goddard Bolt

Golden Earring's "RADAR LOVE." I love that song and wish it would get more airplay.

Sorry to see him go so young. That it was cancer explains that.

The irony for me was going almost directly from the show to reading that post. BTW, the chef that went home was supposedly combining the concept of JAMAICAN food and ramen, and the result was neither Jamaican food nor ramen. I mentioned Southern food in my previous post. My point was completely intact- the dish contained none of the concept- but for the curious, I wanted to be factually correct. (Even though it was unnecessary to make the correction in order to make MY point, I like to be factually correct anyway.)