Question of the Day: MLW Edition

for me, clearly, the thing that my participation here has most ... (9.60 / 5)

impressed on me is, firstly,  that it is significantly less clear today what being "a liberal" actually means than what it seems to me I understood it to mean some thrity or thirty-five years ago.  And that, secondly, in general, we liberals are just as much in need of persistent introspection and mutually-posed searching-questions as are any of the rest of the folks on the political spectrum.

  Basically, I think, we're faced with "rebuilding" from what looks to me like "scratch".

  The benefits of liberal political thought aren't gained by "osmosis" or by "magic".  And the benefits of an informed, enlightened and politically aware and responsible society--all of which are of inestimable value--aren't to be had without continuous effort.  What we can or cannot do as a society depends in an important part directly on what we possess in the way of political sophisitication as a society.

  These elements would constitute
  my "lesson No. 1 " reinforced by participating here.  Thanks to all who contributed to that.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 09:23:58 AM CDT

Not to comment on the immigration issue, that's what I learned. (7.00 / 1)

---

by: Handy_Andy @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 10:04:15 AM CDT

well, maybe you should look at it this way... (11.00 / 1)

sometimes you have to really fight for and defend your point of view here.  Think of it as valuable training.  The skills you hone here you can use there.  Fighting them here so that you _can_ fight "them"  "over there".

  Persist.  Persist.  Persist.

  take a break and persist some more.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 10:34:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Where did I hear that rationale before? (0.00 / 0)

Oh yes. Now I remember.  "We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here," the Turd in Chief keeps saying.

And no, I'm not going to be the voice crying in the ILLEGAL immigration wilderness because I get really angry when I'm called a racist.

I'm not a racist, nor am I prone to violence, but when someone calls me a racist I want to bury my fist in their face, taking out as many of their teeth as I can manage. So, since it's hard to knock out someone's teeth over the internet, I'll stick to commenting on MLW issues I agree with, adding my 2-cents worth where applicable.

---

by: Handy_Andy @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 15:27:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What I've learned... (9.50 / 4)

I've learned that people have different layers and that their online persona is not necessarily who they are, or who you would know if you met them.

Just because someone might come online to rant and rage, we may just be seeing one side of that person, and not even necessarily the major side. 

Some people might be using their time online to free their inner asshole.  But it doesn't mean they are assholes.  Then again, they could be. 

Have a wonderful Wednesday.

---

by: Tom P @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 10:34:58 AM CDT

I can supply you with notarized letters (7.50 / 6)

which verify the fact that I am an asshole at both MLW and in meatspace.

---

by: beagleandtabby @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 11:05:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A friend of mine once said something I find useful to remember from time to time. (7.33 / 3)

Everyone has SOMETHING wrong with them, he said, paraphrasing the old cliche about no one being perfect.

The way he said it struck a cord with me that the cliche never did, and it has helped me to be less judgemental.

I like your "inner asshole" comment though.

---

by: Handy_Andy @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 15:36:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My most significant experience was being banned. (8.25 / 4)

Mainly because it really showed me a lot of about who everyone was, and what they really believed.  Which is why I cannot agree with your statement that:

MLW, at its best, was a place where people were encouraged to share themselves, instead of being like so many other blogs, where political discussion was a contest to be the most pure or the most dedicated.

MLW is like every other community of people, with the same tensions that arise between the "cool kids" and the rebels/nerds/outsiders. 

Still, you make an excellent point:  All relationships, even online ones, can lead to growth.

---

by: cityduck @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 11:36:33 AM CDT

Oh city, you're a skatin' (0.00 / 0)

and the ice is mighty thin.

Don't make me do what I've been wanting to do for so long.

And I'm not talking about banning.  You should be so lucky.

You know that the duck is the natural enemy of the beagle don't you?

The duck and the rabbit.

Oh yeah, I forgot about gofers and moles.  And soup bones.  The beagle has many natural enemies.  But mostly ducks.  countryducks.  suburbanducks.  euroducks.  terroristducks.  alcoholicducks.  pro-choiceducks.  zionistducks.  palestinianducks.  immigrantducks.  gayducks.  freeperducks.  dickcheney'sbestfriendducks.  liberalducks.  And especially cityducks! 

My beagle has chewed through about fifteen ducks in her short life.  Oddly, we get them right here in the toy section of pet store in the city.  So they are, in a manner of speaking, cityducks.

---

by: beagleandtabby @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 17:46:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

MLW (10.38 / 8)

What's the most significant thing I've learned or experienced?

That's a toughie, eugene.

Like you, I've made some friends here of people who now rank as Very Important in my life.  I've gotten a lot of support here which has come to be more meaningful to me than I thought it could be.  This is probably the most significant thing I've experienced here.  I know it works differently for a lot of people.

I've learned a lot by reading first-person stories by folks who live lives that look nothing like mine.  Really amazing.  I'm not being specific on purpose, but that has meant so much to me.

I've become aware of things going on in the world that I'm sure I wouldn't have known about without MLW.  I've refined some of my positions.

I've learned that even liberals don't use their critical thinking skills all the time.  But that's just the human condition, I suppose.  (Except for me, I mean, except for me.)

I've learned that issues I have in real-life manifest themselves online, too.  Why this was a surprise to me, I'm not sure, but there you have it.

I learned that I really like asking questions and that running out of them hasn't been as big of an issue as I thought it might be.  (At least not yet.)

Oh, also?  I've learned that gato is a motherfucking RIOT.

I heart MLW.

"All that is gold does not glitter. Not all those who wander are lost." Tolkien

---

by: Rachel @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 11:38:49 AM CDT

Rachel (8.33 / 6)

Yes, yes, yes I have so many more names - this is an incredible community.  But, Rachel put down a big fat welcome mat in the form of the Question of the Day.  It said, please come inside because you are welcome.  I love her for it.

I feel that Maryscott's writing kicks my ass. When I feel complacent in my thinking, her posts can wake me up. I learn so much from such excellent writers. The research is really good, yet the depth and range of personal disclosure that frame the political posts are a gift.

Flame wars or hateful threads are easily ignored. They just don't interest me. Certain names show up and I just move on to read what nurtures or supports me.  because i can.

The Daily Kos stance about 'Women's issues' put me off and I enjoyed a rebuttal.

---

by: katecontinued @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 11:56:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What I learned in school today... (10.00 / 8)

...that asking better questions is a hard-learned skill, and I'm not referring to the QotD.

...that logic is not a given, not for anyone.

...that the internet is like strychnine to people's brain-mouth filter. (Okay, so I knew that a long time before coming to MLW, but this blog has provided a lot of reinforcement for that opinion.)

...that it's difficult for people to differentiate their opinions from anything approaching facts, findings and/or data.

...that in the end, I'm a critical realist, not a constructivist.

...that Rachel has the patience and forbearance of a saint. Maybe two saints.

A cat's got her own opinion of human beings. She doesn't say much, but you can tell enough to make you anxious not to hear the whole of it.

---

by: gatoscuro @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 11:55:46 AM CDT

brava or bravo, as the case may be... (9.00 / 1)

  which am I?  Critical realist or constructivist?  And how do I tell?

  you're a definite asset here, Gato!

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 12:22:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

-o or -a... (6.50 / 2)

It depends on my moods. (However, the driver's license indicates 'brava'.) I never let a little thing like gender get in the way of a good nickname.

Constructivism and Critical Realism... this is a dichotomy I bring up in classes every semester, since it is rather topical for psychology. I turn here to Funder (2004) because he's got a way with words.

Constructivism, very simply, is the attitude that reality, as a concrete entity, does not exist. All that does exist are human ideas or constructions of reality...[the] implication is that there is no way to regard one interpretation of reality as accurate and another interpretation as inaccurate, because all interpretations are mere "social constructions" (Kruglanski, 1989).

This point of view--that since there is no reality, judgmental accuracy cannot be assessed meaningfully--is quite fashionable today. Nevertheless, I reject it (Funder, 1995). To regard independent reality as nonexistent and accuracy as meaningless is a nihilistic point of view that withers under serious scrutiny.

I find another philosophical school, called critical realism, more reasonable. Critical realism holds that the absence of perfect, infallible criteria for truth should not force one to conclude that all interpretations of reality are equally likely to be correct (Rorer, 1990). Indeed, even psychological researchers who argue that accuracy issues are not meaningfull (constructivists) still find themselves choosing between research conclusions they regard as more or less valid--even though their choices might sometimes be wrong. as researchers, they implicitly recognize that the only option is to make such choices as reasonably as possible, based on whatever information is at hand or can be gathered...

Thanks, prox, for giving me an opening through which I may prattle freely.

A cat's got her own opinion of human beings. She doesn't say much, but you can tell enough to make you anxious not to hear the whole of it.

---

by: gatoscuro @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 12:32:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

and a caveat... (0.00 / 0)

...with regards to constructivism and critical realism. Constructivism encompasses the theory that such social phenomena as gender and class are constructed--fundamentally rejecting essentialism. Psychology can get very muddy in differentiating constructivism and critical realism because on one hand, the field has a huge body of research showing just how much of how we are is socially constructed and/or influenced/channeled... but on the other hand the field has the empirical bent that drives it towards critical realism.

A cat's got her own opinion of human beings. She doesn't say much, but you can tell enough to make you anxious not to hear the whole of it.

---

by: gatoscuro @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 12:59:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

my pleasure... and thank you for the intro to these... (6.00 / 1)

I see. 

  Well, I am definitely in the critical realist camp by the notes above.  Though, at the same time, I agree that gender and class are constructed.  I think that they are no less "real" for that, however.  They could be constructed quite differently, I suppose, but they would still be "real" in any case.

  There's something almost "Bushian" in the suggestion that only the immutable can ever really be "real".  "I 'stay the course,' ergo sum."?  Nah.

  I think that much of the difficulty turns around how to define or understand what is real.

  Whether there is anything real or nothing real--I dispute that both can be true at once, that is, that there can be both _some_ real things and _none_ at the same time, or, these terms do not mean anything--is one question and then whether what _is_ "real" is pure human construct or not, another question.

  Betrand Russell advanced progress considerably by bringing to better light the fact that our language affords the opportunity to formulate statements which, while seeming to convey valid meaning, in fact have none-- are meaningless and thus they don't describe or indicate anything.  As far as content is concerned they are "empty".

  When these are "removed" so are some confusing pseudo-statements regarding reality or "non-reality".

  Does anything objective exist which is independent of human existence?  I believe so.  It seems to me that to deny that is to assume that "the world" and "human existence" are inseparable and each "came about" spontaneously and concurrently with the advent of human existence.

  But observable, testable evidence does not support that view.  There should, in such a case, be evidence of human existence for as far back as the evidence of the earliest physical matter.  But there is not.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 15:08:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Constructed gender (0.00 / 0)

Would it be better to say that someof the social roles involved in gender are onstructed?

As you know, a few decades ago, constructivists conducted a little expoeriment.  When infants were sexualkly deformed, or male genialia were badly maimed, those who thought that gender was socially degtermined, then in ascendence, decreed that one should simply remove what is left, fashion a pseudo-vulva, and raise the result as a boy.

Turns out that it doesn't work.

I wouold think t is time to acknowledge the science, insteasd of grasping at an old religion.  ehaviour is somewhat genetically determined, and also somewhat dependent on pre-natal environment.  Ity is not surprising that gender behaviour would be more so than, say, artistic behaviour.  Evolution would b=ppredict so.

Quadruplicity drinks duplicity, I always say.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 21:18:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Um, Madscientist... (9.00 / 1)

those children were raised as girls. In caser you hadn't noticed, vulvae belong to girls and scrota to boys...

How well it works/worked depends on a lot of factors, of which environment is only one. For instance: there is a syndrome called androgen insensitivity syndrome, in which genetic males with testes (hidden in the abdomen) have normal female external genitalia. A lot of these aren't found out until they're teenagers and not menstruating. Many of them prefer to stay "female". Yet many of the genetic males with ambiguous genitalia, raised as girls, prefer reassignment at puberty...even if their testes were removed.

It wasn't just "constructivists": the reassignment of gender depending on how easily the oddities could be "reconstructed" to one or another was, alas, the medical standard (with the default usually female). The (probably Freudian in origin) theory was that not making a definite assignment of gender would confuse the kid way too much growing up. Nobody bothered to wait and ask the kids when they were older.

What was found when someone finally did sit down and ask adults who had had these kinds of surgery as kids is that they had very clear ideas which sex they wanted to be considered. Sometimes it conformed to their genetics, sometimes to appearance, but that what sex they were raised was the least of it...and if there was confusion, it was "Why the hell didn't they wait and let me decide, rather than putting me through surgery then that I want reversed now?" Medical opinion is slowly coming around to that idea of letting the kids decide once they're old enough for definitive surgery.

But examination of the available data leads only to the conclusion that the biggest beneficiary of the Bush Presidency is Warren Harding. (Steve Mirsky, "Antigravity", SciAm 10/05)
Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est. (Latin for All Occasions)

---

by: mirrim @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 22:18:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Must be a bad night (0.00 / 0)

those children were raised as girls. In caser you hadn't noticed, vulvae belong to girls and scrota to boys...

Yep, that was the point.

For instance: there is a syndrome called androgen insensitivity syndrome, in which genetic males with testes (hidden in the abdomen) have normal female external genitalia.

know it well.

It wasn't just "constructivists": the reassignment of gender depending on how easily the oddities could be "reconstructed" to one or another was, alas, the medical standard (with the default usually female). The (probably Freudian in origin) theory was that not making a definite assignment of gender would confuse the kid way too much growing up. Nobody bothered to wait and ask the kids when they were older.

Yes, true, but impossible without the notion that gender was a social construct.  Had the medical standard at the time held that there was a large genetic component to gender, then this would not have happened so glibly.  Remember, this was the heyday of seeing everything as socially caused.  Parents were urged to stop war by giving their little boys dolls, for instance.  Remember "I'm depraved on accounta I'm deprived."  Social excplanations for everything in society.

I remember when the kibbutz studies came in and, to my mind, destroyed this notion of gender.

Medical opinion is slowly coming around to that idea of letting the kids decide once they're old enough for definitive surgery.

And now, in our wisdom, we know that gender is also not merely genetics (as testicular feminization tells us--it's the mouse name!)  At the time, so far as i remember, male constructive surgery was not available.  so, at the time, thinking that gender was wsocial, it seemed like the right thing to do.

And you are right, just as we have (somewhat) overcome our bivalent notion of sexuality, we are beginning to overcome our bivalent notion of gender.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 22:38:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think you miss my point, but in this case that is quite understandable... (0.00 / 0)

  Yes, I agree with you in an important sense.

  "Would it be better to say that someof the social roles involved in gender are onstructed?"

  that, the above cited, is precisely what I did intend to say.

  People are usually born being either male or female --physically.  By physically, I mean mainly but not absolutely exclusively with respect to their reproductive systems  and, to a greatly lesser extent--I submit, and one so far hardly susceptible to means of measurement--in their psychological make-up.  This latter, I believe, is greatly overestimated in its extent and its importance; that means that I suspect that females and males have far, far more in common in their inherent psychological make up than they do in inherent differences.

  The sociallly constructed sexually identities are what I intended by "constructed gender"--the way people are expected, conditioned, to think of themselves in what is commonly thought of as male or female.  That, though constructed, is none the less "real" in impportant senses and it seems to me that it should not surprise us that, if someone who is born female or male, whatever the state of his or her sexual organs, he or she does not readily or easily accept, adapt to, the imposition of the other gender by simple fiat.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Thu Oct 05, 2006 at 06:17:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think (0.00 / 0)

we probably ae pretty much in agreement.

People are usually born being either male or female --physically. 

Part of "physically" is the brain.  In rodents,it is ridiculously easy to create any combination of internal, external and brain gender in a rat by manipulating hormones at the right time.  (So far as I know, no one has done these experiments on humans, but it is the typoe of science we madscientists would love to do.  For the good of mankind, of course.)  I think that a ;lot of what we call gender behaviour comes out of the physical, brain and hormone.

But there is a vast area which is culture specific, and, in my prejudice, i would like to find another name for.  For instance, i can remember at a young age, when adults like to ask you questions and get those cute answers, when asked what the difference between boiys and girls was, I answeered with "boys have short hair and girls have long hair."  This is despite my bathing with my sister many times!  Of course, this is, to my knowledge, 100% cultural.

I suspect that females and males have far, far more in common in their inherent psychological make up than they do in inherent differences.

I do too, but there are differences, and some are gender based.  The way I like to think about what you so adequately said is that for any gender-differing trait, one can plot a bell curve for both males and females which will be offset at the mean.  However, the area of overlap is much larger than the areas of non-overlap.  I'm not sure if that is clear.

In light of this, it seems to me, in fact, it is obvious to me, that choices of individuals for any tasks, jobs, and the like should be based on the individual, not on the gender.  I mean it has always seemed to be obvious to me.

It's like the variation of the old "gay" question:  "would you want a woman in the foxhole with you?  That depends on how she shoots!


"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Thu Oct 05, 2006 at 07:42:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

work in progress (10.75 / 8)

I often feel that I'm too real and blunt for most people - that they're not quite sure what to do with me. Which has resulted in long-term insecurity issues on a number of levels. Being here gave me the opportunity to express what I saw going on around me without being shot down for being less credentialed, less educated, too female, too old, too young, too leftist, too crazy, or any number of other characteristics that would elsewhere render me irrelevant or unworthy of being heard.

Aside from that, it is valuable to me to know there are other like-minded people out there, and the whole country isn't populated by neo-con fascists.

But what I will remember most are the few strikingly brilliant, insightful writers, who made me think and opened me up to parts of myself I didn't know were there.

national shopping boycott April 15 - April 22 www.wearenotbuyingit.org

---

by: bluebird of happiness @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 12:42:59 PM CDT

That's funny. (7.00 / 1)

I thought you were very educated this entire time.

Who knew?

---

by: beagleandtabby @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 16:41:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Credentialism (0.00 / 0)

is the will to mediocrity.

too female

How can anyone be too female?

Relatedly, perhaps:

opened me up to parts of myself I didn't know were there.

I'm not even going to touch that one.....


"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 21:22:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nice Question. (10.00 / 3)

Hell, but I haven;t learned anything.  I am a know it all bitch, aren't I???  LOL

Seriously, I learn so much from all of you every single day.  Hell I even wrote a diary once about what is right wonderful about this place :)

I adore this place and all its many facets and valuable people...and yeah Gato is fucking hilarious, Rae.  Second on that!

I've learnd even the strongest people all have issues, and I'm not the only one a little broken.  That it doesn't make me less, it makes me human. 

Some of you are so kindred to me in spirit, and others so alien, and yet, I learn from both.

I found dinosaur pictures are better kept to myself!

It's been a great 6 months for me, and I have to thank Maryscott for creating the enormously cool atmosphere here.  She is really one of a kind!  In the best way possible.

Peace, D

---

by: Diane W @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 14:45:11 PM CDT

Exposed (10.75 / 4)

MLW has been a growing experience for me. 

When I first signed up to post here I was very naive.  I had discovered the blogoshere some 8 months earlier and had posted on a couple of sites, one rather consistantly.  The one I posted on had a very focused subject and since I was interested in everything from A to Z I was really excited when I found My Left Wing.

This site covered everything, I mean it was like I had died and gone to heaven.  No subject was 'off limits' (as I had noted on one of the larger sites I had visited). 

I jumped in with both feet not knowing anything about meta, cliques, flame wars, etc.  I think now, back to my first few meetings in a 12 step program, I was absolutely in love with it but so naive.  I held everyone on a pedestal in those first few months of meetings.  No one could do any wrong.

That is the mindset I had when I came here.  I started posting but had/have never done a diary. Time went by and I started to learn about the power of the written word.  I know about the power of the spoken word, but the written word, that was eye opening.  I began to see how easily it is for statements to be misconstrued, how feelings are easily hurt, how sharing can be construed as preaching, how what a word means to one can mean something else to someone else.

I truly believe all that happens here, happens for a reason.  My Left Wing has been here for me for the last 6 months and there are times when I was truly ready to throw in the towel someone would post a most excellent diary about the subject that was causing me so much distress.  I would take it personally, my own message for that day, to keep on keeping on.  My God works in mysterious ways. 

I will end now, but I could go on...and on...and on, but my God, that would be a diary, heaven forbid.  I just want to say that I appreciate so much everyone that posts here.  Everyone is unique and special to me.  I have not formed any close friendships, never attended a meetup (got  close once and was sick I missed it), most likely have offended a lot of people (that I am clueless about), can't write using proper grammer, (to all you teachers out there), but I still feel like I am welcome here.  (But then again, I could be naive about that one too..lol.)  Anyway, thank you all and Maryscott, special thanks to you for allowing me to experience the blogoshere on your very special site. 

---

by: mary4 @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 18:24:17 PM CDT

Wow! thanks for this question. (9.00 / 1)

Dear Eugene . . .

Wow!  What a question.  I am reading this late in the day and wish to respond quickly; however, I think an immediate response will be limited in scope.

My Left Wing as a whole and Maryscott O’Connor individually has brought me to a place I never imagined possible. 

It began four days after the opening of this site on July 17, 2005.  I was among the millions, lost in the musings at Daily Kos.  I submitted a treatise SOCIETAL BUBBLES BURSTING, JOB SECURITY, DEBT, HEALTH CARE, PENSIONS©.  Sassy Texan read and responded to this.  She asked me to please post this exposé at My Left Wing.  I was honored beyond belief.

I never heard of the site; yet, I knew that I wanted to expand my horizons.  At the time, I did not know how.  I was [and perhaps still am] such a novice! 

My reception here was warm and welcoming.  Maryscott herself was the person most expressive in her appreciation of writing at My Left Wing.  Maryscott acknowledged my work in a way that I never imagined; I will never forget her kind encouragements.  I suspect I saved these.

My writing could have easily remained hidden among the masses here as well.  However, Maryscott often recommended my work.  On occasion, my essays were promoted to the front page.  I will never be able to express how special that felt and feels to me!

I too have grown here at My Left Wing.  This is the place I have come to call “home.”  I have met many amazing people, more of which I would like to meet in person.  My life has changed profoundly, all with thanks to Maryscott O’Connor and the community at My Left Wing!

Eugene you mentioned the times of turmoil.  For me, though these were all consuming, I never lost hope; nor did I feel as though all or part of the vitality was lost.  I believe that all relationships evolve.  In order to progress we must pass through a period of adjustment.  People come together as individuals; they remain together when they learn to understand it is not all about “us,” me, myself, and I.

It is only the giving that makes us what [who] we are. - Ian Anderson. Jethro Tull . . . Betsy
BeThink.org

---

by: Betsy L. Angert @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 18:40:10 PM CDT

hey E. (9.00 / 1)

I have learned many things here, most from investigating MSOC's fascinating profiles on her Open Threads...

Some stuff about HTML....

RubDMC is a fount of knowledge...

Gottlieb is always informative...

But one thing I have learned is disheartening....that otherwise intelligent people would withhold or waste their votes in the most crucial series of elections they are likely to see in their lifetime....

conviction is a fine thing, and so is compromise....

"Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

---

by: durrati @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 19:53:16 PM CDT

That I wasn't alone (9.00 / 1)

That there were folks as fed up as I am/was.

That there were people willing to read what I wrote.

But examination of the available data leads only to the conclusion that the biggest beneficiary of the Bush Presidency is Warren Harding. (Steve Mirsky, "Antigravity", SciAm 10/05)
Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est. (Latin for All Occasions)

---

by: mirrim @ Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 22:21:53 PM CDT