Another Senator saying he holds out hope for a continued movement to a "further right"

 What exactly is this "further right" he speaks of?   Is he certain that his definition and ideal "further right" are even remotely similar to other "fellows" ideals for "further right?"  

 Does he consider the agendas of well-armed fringe groups, who would certainly paint themselves with the brush of "further right" as they send what little $ they can to support a blatantly outspoken, yet clearly deluded man with whom, in reality, they've precious little in common beyond admiration for his disrespect of anyone who disagrees with his wild and varied speculations which reflect his puffery and egomaniacal imaginings based mostly in anger and self-doubt and a need to silence all dissention.  

Are these disparate pieces of "further right" in any way unified or in balance outside of their vitriolic, almost hateful energy - fueled by fear of losing control - over self and over others - over destinies.  Is racial bigotry and fear the unifying force within the "further right" today?  Does this man believe his religious righteousness is reflected, in ANY significant measure, within the agenda of those fringe groups who were emboldened by a recklessly deluded ex-president's rhetoric, filled with an endless chain of utterly false, baseless accusations fueled by one absurd conspiracy-theory after another... anger and - distrust and hate born of fear being the GLUE for this unhealthy reflection of a very malignant, tumorous growth upon the heart of what was once an honorable, if still fearful, basis for a shared vision of a return to honor and wholesome values which are based in a positive message of togetherness and not upon any judgment or inflation of gulfs which separate us from our fellow citizens.  All sides have allowed a sickness to penetrate and permeate within our ranks - highlighting our differences and exaggerating them - widening the gulf until we're no longer united within these "United States" which we all claim are ours, and ours alone.  We must find a way to STOP this division, this single, sinister path to .. what I believe is certainly ruinous - we have to recognize and acknowledge our own actions which contribute to this angry, subversive disunion.  In our democracy, when our votes have been tallied and we have suffered what we view as a loss, due strictly to a majority which has not agreed with our own agenda - we do not immediately cry "foul" and throw a temper tantrum, threatening revolution and sowing seeds of hate or violent discontent!  THAT IS NOT AMERICAN!!!!

   We work to bridge the gaps - to understand the things which compel ourselves and those who do not hold with all of our tightly held beliefs... we seek to learn and - to _compromise_ -- not our values or beliefs - but compromise with our fellows, by seeking common ground and SHARED dreams for the future.

Damn - we have to MAKE ROOM, in our visions for the future, for those fellow humans with whom upon all subjects we are NOT in full agreement.  How dull and -- truly dystopian the world would be if no one ever disagreed with any of our own opinions and beliefs.  Lord save us from such a false and malevolent vision of a shackled and constricted future.  WE ARE BETTER THAN THAT.  FUCK MAN... "Love thy Neighbor!"...   it doesn't say "Love thy Neighbor, so long as he agrees with you on all matters of opinion, taste and politic."

 RIGHT!?????

All of this is easier said - FAR easier said - than done, of course.  Well of course it is - 

Behavior on a forum. I rant against the ranters, or don't "doucherant" the noob

I had fun with this.  I had asked a question on a forum for satellite TV users, and got a scathing reply from some douchebag who didn't even realize I had asked a question, but rather thought I was making some technical assertion for my ego's sake, so he felt he had to put me in my place with a " we already know that" and "newbs always say what they know without reading...".  I had read the entire thread, had come across two completely contradictory posts, and was asking which one was correct.  Anyway, I decided to mess with the fragile forum-junkie for a bit.  The reason I decided to blog it was that I was so amused with myself and my utter brilliance with the hastily crafted response.  You already know that I am "aprilia1k" everywhere I go:

"

Quote:

Originally Posted by subeluvr I agree, but it's not too much to expect anyone looking for help to read back at least the last two or three pages in a long thread to see what the current info is because in many cases the answer to their question is in those last pages. Let's not forget that these are self-help forums and not do it for me forums...

Aren't they just called "forums"? ;-)

Or, perhaps "support forums?". I Really don't mean to be argumentative, but I am not seeing any mention of "self-help" OR "help me" in the naming. Just think the nomenclature is not necessarily universal. My point was clearly conceding that reading a little first is a good idea, but the venomous chastising (whether you think it is "deservedly" dispensed or not ) is never warranted. It's negative, infantile and rude. No need to say it again (do i need the last word or do you? etc...). I don't disagree with you about proper usage of such a thread; it's a courtesy to pre-read a bit to be sure. I am sure there are cases, as you say, where the answer is a page or two back. 

When I read this thread, I see a huge amount of chastisement, and these scoldings rarely ever ANSWER or ILLUMINATE, as though for punishment the offender must "keep reading" or seek elsewhere. If you're honest, you know I'm right. Go back and read it. All of that content just further obfuscates, hides the information a "NOOB" is looking for. And it explains why so many people start off their post with "I apologize if this question is stupid or has already been answered...". People shouldn't have to start off their posts in this manner. If, instead, the knowledgeable amongst us (not meaning myself) behaved like Rich and simply answered, helped - then the thread would be FULL of answers and illuminating info, instead of peppered with them, interspersed with the policing of the few upon the many.

It is clear that you are trying, and somewhat successfully for sure, to calm and soothe the "ogre" ;-), and I applaud you for that. Think that's likely why you posted this last one, to say "we understand', and yeah - kudos for that. Still, hope there's room for discouraging rudeness and perhaps for change. I stress this as being perhaps the most important point of all, on my part - while your "prickly but cool EE" is my "ogre under the bridge" within the forum, it bears remembering that, if he learns to lighten up, adjust the frown towards more of a smile with time, and to cut everyone a whole lot of slack - well, he will LIVE LONGER, be less-stressed and more healthy. That's not speculation, that's a fact.

Mods: I apologize if you think it's disruptive; I hope you see a little entertainment as well as a pertinent reminder for some serious-minded folks to enjoy themselves a little and to try being a little more courteous and friendly.

I apologize for the apparent "beating-of-the-deceased-equine", sincerely. But I think it's important to effect a shift in this unhelpful and discouraging behavior. People are afraid to post here. They start their posts with "I apologize" to try to avoid flames.

Speaking of which, I just got a private flame from the "ogre under the bridge" as I've decided to call him. You know who he is, he says he's an "EE" and at least half of his posts are attacks without any subsequent informative content. He says I "have nothing to show in public against (his) knowledge and experience". He just doesn't get it. It's not a contest. I also am not "out to get him" or compete. I am talking about rude behavior that discourages newcomers from even participating. I have analyzed the thread and there are _very_ few queries that had already been answered recently, if at all. There are numerous posts berating people though. If, like Rich, a person just simply sighed and "answered again", then the thread would be full of answers - and there would be fewer offensive NOOBs for the ogres to deal with.

My original post here was a question, stating (correctly and undeniably) that there was contradictory info regarding FS used by HR's... , and asking what was really correct please?

 He read it partially, didn't glean that there was a question, and thought I was asserting some technical info perhaps to inflate my ego or something, and - threatened by this - he posted an insulting reply that "everybody knows that" and "newbs always do this", paraphrased. It was very revealing in terms of the fragile ego and what-not, but it was also rude, unproductive and unjustified. He has never apologized to anyone on any threads I've perused, and is often, as was the case with me, outright mistaken about what was said or asked, or intended, cuz he's made it where it's impossible to tip-toe without hitting one of his toes. ;-) 

SMILE. I WANT YA TO LIVE LONGER, HONEST BROTHER.

Said equine thoroughly thrashed and buried. No more justifications. Wrong or Right, I'm asking for a little civility to future "NOOBS" (short for "NOt OBSessed with satellite forums) ;-) Just kidding, really."

Adaptation

Just need to get this down, before feeding the kid and hooking up my headset/mic so's I can give "talking" my blog and ... attempting the voice or speech interface of driving one's computer. 

The thing that others perceive as the person who is "me" - it's really, at best, a representation or a facsimile... no not a copy, a...  well, it's the interface, or interface , that is interacting with them.  The mind, well --- the speed of thought, for some - myself anyway - is just way faster than the speed of speech.  Like, for me, the idea of thinking out loud is ludicrous - beyond just verbalizing one or two specific thoughts anyway.   I couldn't possibly speak quickly enough to narrate, to verbalize, that mess.  By the time I speak a sentence, I've had dozens of separate thoughts - at least.  The sentence is, of course, often made far less comprehensible no doubt.  By the sound of it, you'd think that with all that time available, that every sentence spoken would be a gem, a true work of brilliance.  Heh.  Well, it is for some, more so than others - certainly more than I.  My problem is, I'm not really in control, not truly the master of my mind.  I envision trying to ride a wild horse that doesn't like being ridden, being sat on.  That's how I picture trying to "drive" this thing.  So - the fact that speech is a slow medium relative to thought means nothing, in terms of being able to do something amazing with any individual verbalization.  Sometimes I feel lucky to get a sentence, any sentence, out - in a semi-coherent manner.  I started out thinking about when I was a child - a bright, semi-precocious yet very naive (i.e. not street smart) child.  I started doing that supposed thinking-out-loud thing, I think in response to having just watched a movie that had a ton of voice-over narrative, y'know - inner thoughts stuff, done in voice-over.  Nic Cage was really damn good.  Guy has evolved a ton.  This was a movie done nine years ago too, 2002.  Oh well, better late than never.  I have to go do that feed-the-kid thing.  Eh.  My dog's my kid.  Maybe you understand.

My point about what others perceive as the person we are - just that it's clearly just the person we present.  Since most folks, in their daily lives anyway, are generally honest and not continuously duplicitous, then it's likely that the person presented is a fair representation of what's going on inside.  No way to be certain of that - not always - but it's probably safe to go ahead and assume it in most situations.  As far as really knowing someone - well, that is probably a lifelong endeavor for most reasonably intelligent people.  Maybe worthwhile every so often.  And of course there are exceptions - the rambling barrage of the over-sharer, the occasional verbal-dysentary afflicted narrator of one's own life.  There are always exceptions.  For me - I don't even know me.  Would probably make it difficult to be very good at acting - at least according to some.  Then again, perhaps I do, and don't see it clearly - a recurring problem for me.  Heh.  Oh yeah - kid.  food.  now.