On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:40:33 -0400, "Dr. Dr. Dr. Karen Grear, MD, PhD,
STD" wrote:

On 10/27/10 6:45 AM, Paul@BYC wrote:
On 10/27/2010 6:24 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:00:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 5:50 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:01:53 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 3:38 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/26/2010 3:18 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:19:34 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 11:43 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 19:00:01 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/25/2010 12:28 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day.
Rich? Retired? Not me.

I work from home, my wife is my boss, and after 20 years,
we still get
along, couldn't be better. Admittedly much of our business
is now
automated, but we spent many a year and hour getting here



I teach at a university in the middle of the state.

What do you teach?

Upper level undergrad and some grad courses in the traditional
liberal
arts.

Uh oh, one of the brainwashers!

As you know, ignorance is being worn as a badge of honor by a good
many Americans, including certain beverage-based political
organizations.

Glad to hear there's still some who are committed to
edumacating our
yungins.


Through no fault of mine, we have a very high percentage of our
students
going on to receive doctorates in the arts and sciences.
Smart is encouraged; stupid is not. :)

And still a political troll post, no matter how you look at it...


It is trolling to mention teaching and academic achievement?

Look out, you've already raised some hairs. Just mentioning higher ed
makes folks nervous around here...

Kool-aid is served year 'round hereabouts.


There really is a strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in this
country, more so than at any other time I can remember. It's too bad
because a dumbed down America will go down the tubes.

You mean "down the tubes" faster. The Chinese are turning out
engineers at 10 times the rate we are, many of them studying at our
universities.

The emergence of this beverage-based group really puts a point on it.
Their candidates don't require a basic knowledge of the constitution,
pivotal supreme court rulings or basic tenets of law. Instead, they
just supply a few common sense-isms, rail on the media, taxes, them
smart folks who got us in all this trouble, and mention the day they
accepted Jesus into their lives as their personal lord and savior.

That's it! You're electable and ready to govern! Yahooo!

Please don't feel obligated to respond. I'm already tainted by the
"liberal" stamp and you can remain above the fray. You should try to
keep it that way as long as possible since you'll have chosen sides
otherwise.

I hope your students help our country rediscover the pride of a
liberal arts education, the ability to leverage well-developed
critical thinking skills, and be of a country that accepts the
responsibility of the social compact between citizens, our obligation
to the state and our country.

Screw the greedy, the globalists and anybody who shops Walmart.

It's ok JPS, our new poster already tainted himself, progressives can't
help it, they just can't play fair here or anywhere else...



I don't know you at all, but you seem extraordinarily volatile and
subject to wide mood swings. One minute you seem to agree this would be
a better place without all the personal name calling and the next minute
you're engaging in it.

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.



Paul,
I don't know where you are from, but in my neck of the woods if one
wants to minimize arguments and name calling, it makes sense to avoid
religious and political topics. Now if you enjoy heated debates, you
are right on target.

Debating with the likes of you is like hitting a heavy bag. Thud,
thud, thud. No response. Just dense mass of filling with a coarse
cover.

On Oct 27, 1:15*pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Oct 27, 12:40*pm, "*e#c" wrote:



On Oct 27, 9:54*am, I am Tosk wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:31 AM, I am Tosk wrote:

You seem to be caught up in the rhetoric of those nattering nabobs of
negativism, the tea party and fox news. Not me.

Ahhh, that's it.. I am a conservative, so I must listen to Fox News and
be a teabagger... So narrow minded, these regressives. Everything is
about smearing, shaming, or threatening anybody who opposes the
takeover.

I thought you would appreciate a quote of Spiro T. Agnew, who was a
colorful speaker.

I don't know if you are a teabagger, as you put it. You certainly seem
to share some of the beliefs and attributes of that subset of the GOP.

Well, I'm out of here for most of the rest of today's daylight hours.
Watch out for those Gordian knots.

Uh, just for the record... I am a social liberal, a national
conservative, and a dedicated live and let live libertarian...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

You forgot to add that you are a panty wearing coward who hides under
his desk, posting death threats .- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Since you seem to be on board with the new guidelines and such, I am
up for debate... As to the death threats, you clearly weeks before
offered to kill me for 5 dollars, you have threatened my wife,
threatened to shoot my daughter, and blow up my home along with my
neighbors, yikes! Nobody would blame me for defending myself sooo.. I
responded with something like, "if you come here to kill me, between
me and the CT justice system, you would go home in a box.." *OK, now
we are clear on that but I have another question...Really, you are a
dude, right? What is this "panty goddes", panty goddess, stuff?
Cause,. I gotta' tell you, that almost makes the thought being close
enough to you to blow your frekin' balls off, kinda' weird, really.
Are you trying to "make it weird"? Cause it is, ewwwww.... Hopefully
it won't ruin the experience for me

Ha, ha... sorry guys, but I just couldn't help myself *Sue me....

As to the death threats, you clearly weeks before offered to kill
me for 5 dollars,

But...YOUR threat to " give me the beating I deserve " was posted WAY
before that. I see you conveniently forgot that.

you clearly weeks before offered to kill me for 5 dollars,

That was what I thought the job was worth ie : your not worth more
than 5 bucks.

you have threatened my wife,

This never happened. My words were " If you cant control your husbands
activities on the Internet, things could go very bad"
That...is not a threat of any kind.

threatened to shoot my daughter,

Once again that is you stretching things the way you want them to
look, to make it APPEAR a threat.

My words again were : I hope there's no Hunters in the racing area, a
stray bullet could kill someone".

and blow up my home

Once again, my words were " tick,tick,tick, mother****er "

Explain the threat there? Are you now paranoid?

This is what you reap, when you sow what you did. YOU are to blame for
this response.

What is this "panty goddes", panty goddess, stuff?

You are stupid, so I will explain it. It referrs to you, hiding under
your desk, wearing your Wifes panties, acting like the sniveling
coward you are.

If I ever see you, I wont need a gun to dispatch you, asswipe. Now,
**** off under your desk where you belong.

On 10/27/10 2:38 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:40:33 -0400, "Dr. Dr. Dr. Karen Grear, MD, PhD,
wrote:

On 10/27/10 6:45 AM, Paul@BYC wrote:
On 10/27/2010 6:24 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:00:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 5:50 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:01:53 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 3:38 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/26/2010 3:18 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:19:34 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 11:43 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 19:00:01 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/25/2010 12:28 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day.
Rich? Retired? Not me.

I work from home, my wife is my boss, and after 20 years,
we still get
along, couldn't be better. Admittedly much of our business
is now
automated, but we spent many a year and hour getting here



I teach at a university in the middle of the state.

What do you teach?

Upper level undergrad and some grad courses in the traditional
liberal
arts.

Uh oh, one of the brainwashers!

As you know, ignorance is being worn as a badge of honor by a good
many Americans, including certain beverage-based political
organizations.

Glad to hear there's still some who are committed to
edumacating our
yungins.


Through no fault of mine, we have a very high percentage of our
students
going on to receive doctorates in the arts and sciences.
Smart is encouraged; stupid is not. :)

And still a political troll post, no matter how you look at it...


It is trolling to mention teaching and academic achievement?

Look out, you've already raised some hairs. Just mentioning higher ed
makes folks nervous around here...

Kool-aid is served year 'round hereabouts.


There really is a strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in this
country, more so than at any other time I can remember. It's too bad
because a dumbed down America will go down the tubes.

You mean "down the tubes" faster. The Chinese are turning out
engineers at 10 times the rate we are, many of them studying at our
universities.

The emergence of this beverage-based group really puts a point on it.
Their candidates don't require a basic knowledge of the constitution,
pivotal supreme court rulings or basic tenets of law. Instead, they
just supply a few common sense-isms, rail on the media, taxes, them
smart folks who got us in all this trouble, and mention the day they
accepted Jesus into their lives as their personal lord and savior.

That's it! You're electable and ready to govern! Yahooo!

Please don't feel obligated to respond. I'm already tainted by the
"liberal" stamp and you can remain above the fray. You should try to
keep it that way as long as possible since you'll have chosen sides
otherwise.

I hope your students help our country rediscover the pride of a
liberal arts education, the ability to leverage well-developed
critical thinking skills, and be of a country that accepts the
responsibility of the social compact between citizens, our obligation
to the state and our country.

Screw the greedy, the globalists and anybody who shops Walmart.

It's ok JPS, our new poster already tainted himself, progressives can't
help it, they just can't play fair here or anywhere else...



I don't know you at all, but you seem extraordinarily volatile and
subject to wide mood swings. One minute you seem to agree this would be
a better place without all the personal name calling and the next minute
you're engaging in it.

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.



Paul,
I don't know where you are from, but in my neck of the woods if one
wants to minimize arguments and name calling, it makes sense to avoid
religious and political topics. Now if you enjoy heated debates, you
are right on target.

Debating with the likes of you is like hitting a heavy bag. Thud,
thud, thud. No response. Just dense mass of filling with a coarse
cover.

Again, is calling someone a "dense mass of filling with a course cover"
in the best interest of a kinder and gentler rec.boats?

--
Dr. Dr. Dr.
For a good time.

On 10/27/10 2:35 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:41:23 -0400, "Dr. Dr. Dr. Karen Grear, MD, PhD,
wrote:

On 10/27/10 7:13 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 06:45:47 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.

Now you've done it - sit back and watch the fur fly.

Are you a sociology professor studying internet behavior?


That would make more sense then he is actually trying to get rec.boats
back on topic.

It's pretty obvious you're not a subscriber to higher ed.

Actually I am.

--
Dr. Dr. Dr.
For a good time.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:10:52 -0400, "Harry®" wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:16:01 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:09 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.
/snip



You are suggesting that "the other side" does not want "scientific
development" (which is code for you want no compromise on stem cell
research whatsoever) and you got the LaRaza line down for the rest of
the paragraph, suggesting that the other side is not for "fair play"
which of course is code for "no id's required, free lunch time", and the
whole "scaring large blocks of people" is directed at republicans, even
though the whole "we are gonna' have 8% unemployment if we don't pay off
the unions right now", and "the big bad republicans are sneaking outside
money (like the millions the dems got from Soros and the Chinese
Military in the last few elections) in to "steal" the election when the
dems still have the same money coming in, plus millions from
undocumented donations through the Labor Unions....



I've made no such suggestion. I've merely stated that I am a progressive
and have certain beliefs and values based upon my position as a
progressive. As a student of history, I am an admirer of thinkers on
both sides of our two party political spectrum, including Dwight
Eisenhower, Nelson Rockefeller and even Richard Nixon, two of whom were
both conservative and progressive.

You seem to be caught up in the rhetoric of those nattering nabobs of
negativism, the tea party and fox news. Not me.

Such a shame. For a day or so, I'd thought you were real.

I must be getting old.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H


Paul aka Jim aka Secular Humanist aka Secular Humorist aka Hkar etc.
When things get to dull around here for him, he has wifey sew him up a new
sock puppet. And this is the guy who is encouraging us to play nice.
We've been doing our part,eh?

Yeah, we've been 'trying'. Now, defining 'trying' may be tough, but what the
hey. It's worth a shot. There are a few folks around who can't let go, and may
have a problem. But, they are ignoreable.

I noticed that Paul thought the use of Karen's name was quite the egregious
offense, but said nothing when slammer makes comments like, "...Do you stick the
gun barrel in Terris mouth when you **** her? Does it make you even more turgid,
you little ****ing coward?"

Spoofing is not the best behavior, in my opinion, but it's not nearly as sick as
slammer's crap.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 12:52:06 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:00:42 -0700, jps wrote:

Nowadays, you don't even need the library, although they still come in
handy. Can't imagine seeing a member of a beverage-based party at the
library. They're busy watchin' the tube.

The next generation will look at libraries like we look at 8 track
tapes. Dated information in an obsolete format.

These days you have a library on your phone.

Not the sort of specialized information that professionals or
academics might require.

On 10/27/2010 9:53 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:23 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 8:18 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:51:18 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:13 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 06:45:47 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.

Now you've done it - sit back and watch the fur fly.

Are you a sociology professor studying internet behavior?


That's pretty funny!

If I were, some posters here would make for an interesting study group,
I'd bet.

My underpinnings and teachings are more classical, and less
trade-schoolish, not that there is anything wrong with learning a trade.
In my classes, you might learn what some great thinkers thought, why
they thought that, how those thoughts evolved, how they influence us
today. You'd also be required to write many long papers.


Must the papers be of a certain 'bent' to recieve a good grade?

Of course not. What we like to see is evidence the writer properly
prepared himself by reading and assimilating pertinent works, and spent
significant time thinking and writing so as to present a logical,
coherent paper. In class discussions, any ideas are welcome, but the
presenter has to be able to defend them. We try to teach our students to
think logically and to develop and use their wits.

Yes, "must be able to defend them". Against who? A professor with a
liberal bent that might not challenge one side as vigorously as the
other... Especially if that professor doesn't feel one side needs
defending at all... Watched three kids come through the system, and my
mom was a school administrator for almost 50 years, I know how it
works...




You appear unfamiliar with the process of "defending" one's papers,
thoughts, presentations as it is done at the college/university level. I
say that because you are injecting partisan politics into a process that
has nothing to do with partisan politics. The exercise is intellectual,
not political.

No offense, but you seem eager to point fingers and make accusations,
even on subjects about which you know little or nothing.

The challenges to the presenters come not from me, but from fellow
students chosen at random and given a copy of the paper a few days
before the class discussion. The object of the exercise is to develop
logical thinking processes, not to insult the presenters or the
challengers. My role is that of sometime moderator, to keep the
discussions on track and within the time limitations.

I trust you have the best intentions... I just know how tough it is for
my kid to be in a Social Studies class with a openly regressive teacher
who's car sports a bumper sticker saying "impeach Bush, torture Cheney".
She is a bright kid and knows how to play the game, she has the highest
grades in the class and it's not even her they are grading


You present an interesting paradox. On the one hand, you lament what you
perceive as a decline in freedom of speech and on the other hand, you
lament your kid's teacher expressing his or her freedom of speech on a
bumper sticker.

On 10/27/2010 10:30 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:16:01 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:09 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.
/snip



You are suggesting that "the other side" does not want "scientific
development" (which is code for you want no compromise on stem cell
research whatsoever) and you got the LaRaza line down for the rest of
the paragraph, suggesting that the other side is not for "fair play"
which of course is code for "no id's required, free lunch time", and the
whole "scaring large blocks of people" is directed at republicans, even
though the whole "we are gonna' have 8% unemployment if we don't pay off
the unions right now", and "the big bad republicans are sneaking outside
money (like the millions the dems got from Soros and the Chinese
Military in the last few elections) in to "steal" the election when the
dems still have the same money coming in, plus millions from
undocumented donations through the Labor Unions....



I've made no such suggestion. I've merely stated that I am a progressive
and have certain beliefs and values based upon my position as a
progressive. As a student of history, I am an admirer of thinkers on
both sides of our two party political spectrum, including Dwight
Eisenhower, Nelson Rockefeller and even Richard Nixon, two of whom were
both conservative and progressive.

You seem to be caught up in the rhetoric of those nattering nabobs of
negativism, the tea party and fox news. Not me.

Such a shame. For a day or so, I'd thought you were real.

I must be getting old.


Say what?

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:12:50 -0400, John H
wrote:

Spoofing is not the best behavior, in my opinion, but it's not nearly as sick as
slammer's crap.

John, why do you re-quote it? I'd never see most of that junk if
people didn't reply to it or re-post it in some way. After a while
he'd get tired of talking to himself.

On 10/27/2010 10:32 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:32:49 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 8:18 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:51:18 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:13 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 06:45:47 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.

Now you've done it - sit back and watch the fur fly.

Are you a sociology professor studying internet behavior?


That's pretty funny!

If I were, some posters here would make for an interesting study group,
I'd bet.

My underpinnings and teachings are more classical, and less
trade-schoolish, not that there is anything wrong with learning a trade.
In my classes, you might learn what some great thinkers thought, why
they thought that, how those thoughts evolved, how they influence us
today. You'd also be required to write many long papers.


Must the papers be of a certain 'bent' to recieve a good grade?

Of course not. What we like to see is evidence the writer properly
prepared himself by reading and assimilating pertinent works, and spent
significant time thinking and writing so as to present a logical,
coherent paper. In class discussions, any ideas are welcome, but the
presenter has to be able to defend them. We try to teach our students to
think logically and to develop and use their wits.

Hee, hee. That's cute.

Goodbye.

Please outline your recent experience teaching upper level liberal arts
discussion oriented classes at a major private college or university.