Rich is exposed!

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]

> The worst offenders for publishing poor writing are academic journals,
> and I see much that is poor in mainstream publication also. Next!

The writing was much better when I was growing up then it is now. The
English academics were the best writers in the world. I do not think we will
ever see such fine writing again.
[...]

> Mr. Dolan has Mr. McNamara beat in the humor department by a mile.

If that is true it is because I do not give a damn about anything or anyone
here. Mr. McNamara does.
[...]

> I am not contending anything about the majority of the
> alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent readership. If they believe unfounded
> accusations lacking in proof, that is their failing, not mine.

When you are so far out of step with everyone else, you need to stop and
take stock of yourself. Surely you must have a glimmer by now that you are
in the wrong. Everyone else here is crazy except you?
[...]

> Again, Mr. McNamara refuses to state that he believes that responding
> to parody with physical violence is immoral. Should we judge his
> morality by this? He would not fare well if we do so.

I got it that he would not mind if Mr. Sherman took the law into his own
hands and administered some quick justice to his good buddy Ed Gin. I
suggest a good whacking about the buttocks. Gin will thank you for it and
never post anything again. Then he will return to the land of his origins
and become a Buddhist monk, making amends for all his wickedness.
[...]

> Show me un-doctored videotapes of those you accuse typing the HRS blog
> test into a computer and then prove the blog was posted from that
> computer, and I will accept your accusations as fact.

What comes though strong and clear is that Mr. McNamara is writing about 50
words to every one of Mr. Sherman's, and that Mr. Sherman is just saying the
same old thing over and over. I ask you, who is doing all the work here.
This is a mistake that Mr. Dolan never makes. That is because Mr. Dolan
takes pride in being lazy and does not see why he should work any harder
than anyone else. If fact, in an ideal universe, Mr. Dolan would most
definitely not work as hard as Mr. Sherman, but then practically nothing
would ever get said.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >>...A Handel oratorio or opera is an
>> >> acquired taste. It does not come naturally anymore as it once did back
>> >> in
>> >> his time. And even back in his time it was music written for the
>> >> aristocrats, not for the general public.
>> >
>> > Here Ed Dolan reveals his ignorance. Handel's oratorios were written
>> > for the entertainment of the emerging English middle class, and were
>> > performed for paying audiences in public theaters. The religious
>> > content allowed these upstanding Anglicans to enjoy the "glorious
>> > noise" for its own sake, while paying lip service to piety.
>>
>> There is no middle class public that ever existed anywhere that liked
>> Handel's operas. It is an art strictly for the aristocrats. His
>> oratorios
>> were a phenomenon in England for some strange reason. I think the English
>> just liked choral music. Does anyone today like choral music?
>
> Scandinavians and the English, I believe. Maybe Guy Chapman can comment
> on the latter if he is following this rather lengthy thread.

Guy Chapman got disgusted with us and left long ago. Besides, he just wants
to talk about helmets.

>> >...
>> > Should the taste of the US public be used as an arbiter of quality? An
>> > unbiased observed would have to conclude that contemporary US culture
>> > is rather vulgar for the most part.
>>
>> Yes, alas, only too true, but the European culture for old music also
>> strikes me as being very strange. Apparently there is a small audience
>> for
>> it there, but I am sure there is no great demand for it either. I think
>> it
>> is music mainly being driven by musicians.
>>
>> >> I have the complete keyboard music of Bach on LP records. This
>> >> includes
>> >> both
>> >> for the piano and the organ. I have plowed through it on several
>> >> occasions,
>> >> but no more. Yes, some of it is great music, but it is music that is
>> >> foreign
>> >> to me. I will never love that music. From Haydn on I love music. That
>> >> is
>> >> the
>> >> difference for me at least.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, you do have to marvel at that old music, but do you truly love
>> >> it?
>> >> That
>> >> is the question.
>> >
>> > When performed properly, the best keyboard works of J. S. Bach can
>> > induce a rapturous, near hypnotic state. The listener's surroundings
>> > disappear from consciousness, and only the music remains.
>>
>> Yes, that is true, but still I do not really relate to this music. I
>> always
>> thought Glen Gould (a great specialist in the Bach keyboard music) was
>> crazy
>> the way he carried on....
>
> I prefer pianists who are vocally silent.

Yes, me too. I never bought any of his recordings for precisely that reason.

>> I do think musicians like Bach better than
>> non-musicians. I think one of the main problems that a modern listener
>> will
>> have with Bach is that his music is too intellectual. I do marvel at it,
>> but
>> I don't like it.
>
> J. S. Bach wrote his music for the glory of God and for posterity.

I could not have said that better myself!

>> >> ...
>> >> When I was going to college back in the 50's and 60's it was the
>> >> cheapest
>> >> thing a young person could do. I probably stayed in college longer
>> >> than I
>> >> should have but it was just so cheap. And I enjoyed the life style,
>> >> even
>> >> though I never had any money...
>> >
>> > For the total economic cost of obtaining a graduate degree, I could
>> > attend every CSO concert for the rest of my life of purchase a new,
>> > high quality recumbent bicycle or trike every year. The cost puts the
>> > lie to the notion of equal economic opportunity.
>>
>> Tom, I believe the cost of higher education is going to be reevaluated in
>> the grand scheme of things. Many young people are going to decide to
>> forego
>> college because of the expense. It will not make economic sense for them
>> to
>> attend. I understand this and sympathize with them.
>>
>> Back in the 50's the great California universities were in effect free.
>> There was a small student fee and that was it. We thought at the time it
>> would go on forever, but it all came to a screeching halt rather
>> suddenly.
>> Too bad, but nothing is free forever I guess.
>
> The University of Illinois will cost a frugal undergraduate student
> $5,000+ per semester. Of course this is inexpensive compared to
> comparable private institutions such as Northwestern which would be
> more on the order of $20,000 a semester.
>
>> Now that I am old I worry more about the cost of health care than I do
>> anything else. There are many unresolved problems in our society that are
>> going to have to get taken care of sooner or later. The Dems could come
>> back
>> big time if the Repubs do not respond to social problems that continue to
>> fester.
>
> Family heath insurance will cost a family with no history of major
> problems $7,000 to $9,000 per year. Only 60% of full time employed
> workers in the US have employer provided coverage. Excessive medical
> bills are the cause for over 50% of personal bankruptcy filing.
> Meanwhile, real wages for all but top management are falling, as more
> jobs are exported. Most people are in debt. When the next recession
> comes, life will become ugly for many people who are both willing and
> able to work.

The only real question I have at the moment is what are you doing still up?
Do you realize we have been up all night? Don't you have to go to work
today? I don't want to be responsible for you not getting a good night's
sleep. Mr. McNamara wants you to go to bed too, something I think he did at
least several hours ago.

Best Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. I think we showed all the dunderheads here on ARBR that there is some
Kulture present on this newsgroup even if you do have to stay up all night
to get in on it.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>>Paris is a beautiful city. That no one can deny.
>
> One can only hope that Ed Dolan is not referring to Paris, Illinois.

Apparently there is also a Paris, Texas. I learned of this from watching a
movie on my new digital cable TV subscription which was entitled
"Paris,Texas". This is a real sleeper of a movie and quite good. It is very
different from the usual Hollywood **** and actually manages to strike some
deep chords. It always surprises me whenever I encounter a movie like this
as I have gotten used to what you will normally see on the TV. I stopped
going to movies in theaters some 40 years ago.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> ...
> The only real question I have at the moment is what are you doing still up?
> Do you realize we have been up all night? Don't you have to go to work
> today? I don't want to be responsible for you not getting a good night's
> sleep. Mr. McNamara wants you to go to bed too, something I think he did at
> least several hours ago....

At a certain point of fatigue, sleep become difficult, especially when
one is suffering some distress from ailments. I blame the cartel of
doctors and pharmacists for their anti-competitive, anti-free market
practice of restricting the sale of certain medications that could do
much to alleviate suffering. In addition, the doctors are now cowed by
the DEA accusations of feeding addicts' habits, so now doctors are
loath to prescribe both the needed medications and in the required
quantities.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
"the bacteria people tuned in-as to bioengineering at the correct
wave
Point" - G. Daniels

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> ...
>> The only real question I have at the moment is what are you doing still
>> up?
>> Do you realize we have been up all night? Don't you have to go to work
>> today? I don't want to be responsible for you not getting a good night's
>> sleep. Mr. McNamara wants you to go to bed too, something I think he did
>> at
>> least several hours ago....
>
> At a certain point of fatigue, sleep become difficult, especially when
> one is suffering some distress from ailments. I blame the cartel of
> doctors and pharmacists for their anti-competitive, anti-free market
> practice of restricting the sale of certain medications that could do
> much to alleviate suffering. In addition, the doctors are now cowed by
> the DEA accusations of feeding addicts' habits, so now doctors are
> loath to prescribe both the needed medications and in the required
> quantities.

Tom, you should not be having any serious medical problems that would
prevent you from sleeping, not at your age. I am guessing that you are in
your 40's and since you bicycle you must be in reasonably good shape. Now
when you get to be my age (almost 70) you will have all kinds of health
issues which will drive you crazy. Finally it gets to the point where you
realize that only death itself is going to solve all your health problems.

No one has ever understood my sleeping habits. I sleep right around the
clock, turning night into day and day into night. I tell those who wish to
contact me that the best time to see me is about 3:00 AM., depending on the
day of the month. I have been cursed all my life because I cannot get up in
the morning. I don't believe I have been up before noon for at least 40
years, unless I have been up all the preceding night of course.

The problem with my life style is that you never get anything done, let
alone accomplished. I have a list of to do things a mile long, but they are
never going to get done. By the time I get up the day is shot, and so I just
fritter away the reminder of the day doing God knows what.

The main advantage of having to hold down a job is that it puts you on a
schedule. We humans need schedules. Otherwise, we tend to go off the deep
end. I almost envy folks who have regular jobs, except for the fact that I
hate all work. Leisure is the only thing that makes any sense to me, but not
everyone knows what to do with leisure. And so I do not recommend my life
style to anyone. It takes a lifetime of practice to live the way I do.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> ...
>> Well, yes, there is not much relationship anymore to where it all came
>> from.
>> But still we know where most leftist ideology comes from - Marx and
>> Lenin.
>
> Groucho Marx?
>
>> Ah, for the good old days of the Berlin Wall. Damn that Reagan anyway for
>> winning the Cold War for America and the West!....
>
> Ed Dolan must mean Gorbachev as the person responsible for ending the
> cold war [1]. The cold war could have ended a decade earlier, but
> certain people in the Ford administration deliberately sabotaged
> detente' in the 1970's. They were Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
> and White House Chief of Staff Richard Cheney - I wonder what ever
> happened to those two?
>
> [1] Fearless prediction. As time passes, Gorbachev's reputation will
> gain luster, while Reagan's will become more tarnished.

All of the above is absurd! Any more Presidents like Carter and the US would
have been defeated. Reagan came along just in the nick of time to save us
from the liberal folly. The idea of détente with the Evil Empire just turns
my stomach!

Gorbachev is destined to be either forgotten altogether if Russia becomes a
success or to be reviled if Russia fails. The Russians will then hold
Gorbachev responsible for not adequately defending the old Soviet Union.

However the liberals want to play it, the fact is that the Soviet Union did
not fall of itself. The US had everything to do with it. The Cold War was
real and all the proxy wars that the US fought on behalf of the West,
particularly in Korea and Vietnam, had everything to do with the final
victory.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Well, yes, there is not much relationship anymore to where it all came
> >> from.
> >> But still we know where most leftist ideology comes from - Marx and
> >> Lenin.
> >
> > Groucho Marx?
> >
> >> Ah, for the good old days of the Berlin Wall. Damn that Reagan anyway for
> >> winning the Cold War for America and the West!....
> >
> > Ed Dolan must mean Gorbachev as the person responsible for ending the
> > cold war [1]. The cold war could have ended a decade earlier, but
> > certain people in the Ford administration deliberately sabotaged
> > detente' in the 1970's. They were Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
> > and White House Chief of Staff Richard Cheney - I wonder what ever
> > happened to those two?
> >
> > [1] Fearless prediction. As time passes, Gorbachev's reputation will
> > gain luster, while Reagan's will become more tarnished.
>
> All of the above is absurd! Any more Presidents like Carter and the US would
> have been defeated. Reagan came along just in the nick of time to save us
> from the liberal folly. The idea of détente with the Evil Empire just turns
> my stomach!
>
> Gorbachev is destined to be either forgotten altogether if Russia becomesa
> success or to be reviled if Russia fails. The Russians will then hold
> Gorbachev responsible for not adequately defending the old Soviet Union.
>
> However the liberals want to play it, the fact is that the Soviet Union did
> not fall of itself. The US had everything to do with it. The Cold War was
> real and all the proxy wars that the US fought on behalf of the West,
> particularly in Korea and Vietnam, had everything to do with the final
> victory.

Hey Eddie,

Go easy on your diet of right-wing talk radio and commentary. It is bad
for you mental health.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
"the bacteria people tuned in-as to bioengineering at the correct
wave
Point" - G. Daniels

 

[[email protected]]

Tom,

First order of business - the quoting is a mess due to the nonstandard
method employed by the program Mr. McNamara is using.

This has become a nightmare to follow, but it is not because of a
newsreader program that Mr. McNamara is using. I am not using a
program, just the Google Groups facility. So as not to add to the
confusion, I will just address a few issues right here at the top
rather than interspersed:

1. For what it is worth, unlike you, I have refrained from pointing out
many of your writing shortcomings (grammatical errors, misspellings,
mistakes, and keyboard slips) (egg "test" when you meant "text")
because your intent was communicated clearly enough and this is about
communication ... nothing more ... nothing less.

2. I am not in a contest with Mr. Dolan and appreciate his humor as
well, but understand, as Mr. Dolan so rightly pointed out it is not my
intention to amuse or entertain you.

3. When I have said something qualified with "as I know it", the
operative word being "I", it should be apparent that I understand this
means that I know something to be a fact. This does not imply that
said fact is not privy to someone else who does not know something "as
I know it". I didn't think that statement was in need of
clarification, but apparently you were again in need of interpreter and
I was happy to have been able to assist you in the clarification of
this rudimentary concept ... and, to think that you are someone who
regards himself as intelligent and logical.

4. As pointed out previously, there is nothing dishonest in having
employed a surname initial in order to facilitate communication that
would only be understood by those in or near the inner circle of the
JAG alliance. Just how was I being dishonest by complying with your
mandate that names not be mentioned until those names can be linked
conclusively to the events for which they have been accused? You
really do like putting your adversary in a damned if you do, damned if
you don't predicament don't you? Your finding that, with me, it is a
bit more difficult than it ordinarily is, aren't you?

5. I will not address your preposterous hypothetical story here since I
have already done so in another thread, but I will add that I have no
need or intention to prove that your possible conjecture is impossible
any more than you have any intention to prove that that my conjecture
is impossible. What is a "possible" conjecture? It either is or it is
not.

6. The Johnny NoCom posts and HRS blog have similarities other than
those that you selectively mentioned. I have faith in the readership's
ability to realize that without me having to enumerate. The clamoring
heard from them supports my contention.

7. The reason I have now been included in the blog only remotely has
something to do with accusing people without having proof. Those
involved need little provocation for them to spring into action and
their anticipated response serves to indicate that those whom I have
suspected all along are the ones responsible. It should be obvious,
even to you, that if it were someone other that those whom I suspect
.... whose surname initials I provided and whose first initials you
provided (thanks again), there would have been no cause for a response.
The predictable and telling response in and of itself, in addition to
the inherent attributes of the response, serve as an indictment of the
culpable.

8. Readers, do not be led astray. This is another one of Tom's baffle
'em with ******** replies to confuse the issue. Defining a public
figure from a moral perspective is absurd. Morality has nothing to do
with how a public figure is define where it matters ... in a court
room. Tom, since you are admittedly not a lawyer or a judge then why
not consider what the constitutional law professionals and the Supreme
Court have to say in this matter. Public figures are defined as
follows ... Those who by reason of the notoriety of their achievements
or the vigor and success with which they seek the public's attention,
or those who occupy positions of persuasive power and influence, or
those who have assumed roles of especial prominence in the affairs of
society and have assumed special prominence in the resolution of public
questions, or those who have thrust themselves to the forefront of
particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of
the issues involved are classified as public figures under the First
Amendment. Nonetheless, determination of public figure status is a
question of law, not fact. It is the trial judge who makes that
determination. It does not appear that the targeted individuals fall
into the category of "public figures" as defined, including myself. It
should also be noted that private individuals need only show that a
defamatory falsehood was made negligently (with reckless disregard as
to its truth). Demonstration of malice is not required. If someone
believes that a defamation has occurred through publication of a known
falsehood, the victim can initiate a civil action of libel against the
offending party and collect both compensatory and punitive damages.
The bottom line is that libel and libelous statements are beyond First
Amendment protection. Please note that nowhere do constitutional law
professionals or the Supreme Court include morality in its definition
of a public person, as does Mr. Sherman

9. I've said all that I intend to say with regard to retaliation and
violence and even litigation (again conveniently and deliberately
overlooked). As said previously, I don't have to answer to Mr. Sherman
for feeling as I do. He is free to pass judgment. His opinion in this
regards matters not. I don't answer to him.

10. I see that it is time to enlighten the unenlightened obtuse one ...
Mr. Sherman. The notion that one cannot be convicted on circumstantial
evidence is, of course, FALSE. Most criminal convictions are based on
circumstantial evidence because most criminals are careful not to
generate any direct evidence during the commission of a crime. Courts
often rely on circumstantial evidence to determine the facts of a case.
The laws regarding circumstantial evidence are complex and can vary by
case, but his much can be said. It is a popularly held (particularly
by Tom Sherman) that direct evidence is more important than
circumstantial evidence, however, the two are equal in weight in the
eyes of the law. Some legal experts would even argue that
circumstantial evidence can carry more weight in a case than direct
evidence. Criminal prosecutors often rely heavily on circumstantial
evidence to prove their case. Civil cases are often based solely, or
primarily, on circumstantial evidence, particularly in cases involving
liability. Circumstantial evidence must prove beyond reasonable doubt
the guilt of a criminal defendant in order to elicit a conviction, the
keyword here being "reasonable", something that Tom is not. I trust
this clears things up regarding circumstantial evidence being
insufficient for conviction since this is an everyday occurrence in our
courtrooms. I think we can now put this one to rest. Tom can now quit
harping on this issue unless he wants to further embarrass himself.
Just a reminder, Tom ... don't forget to enroll in that basic logic
course.

11. Mr. McNamara did not misinterpret the "tongue in cheek" smiley
emoticon. I am well acquainted with the smiley as a staple of internet
culture. It should be noted that Mr. Sherman's statement could just as
easily have been made without the inclusion of a number (200), so
naturally assumed that the number had some degree of significance, at
least to Tom. I am convinced that Mr. Sherman would never compose a
sentence comprised of even the most minute, single detail that he would
deem insignificant. Consequently, my question still stands and remains
unanswered. I really am starting to question Tom's judgment. It makes
me wonder about his real mental state (note: a question, not an
accusation). On the other hand, Mr. Sherman consistently lives up to
my expectations.

12. Mr. Sherman has asked that I provide him with un-doctored
videotapes of those I accuse typing the HRS blog text into a computer
and then prove the blog was posted from that computer. He knows
perfectly well that direct evidence of this nature would be difficult,
if not impossible to obtain and might even require violation of the law
in the process and I'll not go there simply because that is what he
requires of me. I refer the readers, and Mr. Sherman, to #8 above. I
am sorry that Mr. Sherman is still having a problem grasping the very
rudimentary concept that circumstantial evidence is grounds not just
for suspicion, but also for conviction. The insistent Mr. Sherman
continually obliges me to conform to a higher a standard than is
required by law. To my disappointment, Mr. Sherman fails to comprehend
that I am under no obligation to jump through a hoop simply because he
has placed in front of me. DUH!!!

Jim McNamara

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Well, yes, there is not much relationship anymore to where it all came
> >> from.
> >> But still we know where most leftist ideology comes from - Marx and
> >> Lenin.
> >
> > Groucho Marx?
> >
> >> Ah, for the good old days of the Berlin Wall. Damn that Reagan anyway
> >> for
> >> winning the Cold War for America and the West!....
> >
> > Ed Dolan must mean Gorbachev as the person responsible for ending the
> > cold war [1]. The cold war could have ended a decade earlier, but
> > certain people in the Ford administration deliberately sabotaged
> > detente' in the 1970's. They were Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
> > and White House Chief of Staff Richard Cheney - I wonder what ever
> > happened to those two?
> >
> > [1] Fearless prediction. As time passes, Gorbachev's reputation will
> > gain luster, while Reagan's will become more tarnished.
>
> All of the above is absurd! Any more Presidents like Carter and the US
> would
> have been defeated. Reagan came along just in the nick of time to save us
> from the liberal folly. The idea of détente with the Evil Empire just
> turns
> my stomach!
>
> Gorbachev is destined to be either forgotten altogether if Russia becomes
> a
> success or to be reviled if Russia fails. The Russians will then hold
> Gorbachev responsible for not adequately defending the old Soviet Union.
>
> However the liberals want to play it, the fact is that the Soviet Union
> did
> not fall of itself. The US had everything to do with it. The Cold War was
> real and all the proxy wars that the US fought on behalf of the West,
> particularly in Korea and Vietnam, had everything to do with the final
> victory.

Tom Sherman wrote:

Hey Eddie,

Go easy on your diet of right-wing talk radio and commentary. It is bad
for you[r] mental health.

Edward Dolan wrote:

The liberal media no longer have the news all to themselves like they used
to when old Walter Cronkite was pontificating on CBS. The execrable NY Times
and Washington Post have lots of competition now. Talk radio has changed
everything for the better as has Fox News and innumerable other conservative
media which hardly existed during the Vietnam War.

This forum, ARBR, was also overrun by liberal know nothings before I showed
up, but that is no longer the case thanks to me. Those who formerly thought
it was a grand thing to do nothing but bash Bush and the Republicans have
learned that they will now be rebutted. We have some balance here where
before there was none.

Liberals like Mr. Sherman would prefer that they be able to spout their
political nonsense without being heckled by the likes of me. However, that
isn't going to happen if I have anything to say about it. I don't listen to
Limbaugh and O'Reilly for nothing you know. Scarborough and Hannity are
pretty good too, but for a real dose of reality you have to go to Mike
Savage. Damn! I can't get him anymore. I think he has been canceled. He was
just too raw for most.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota