Re: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women Don't)

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of politics. I grow

more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right - women's suffrage

(along, it must be said, with " one man one vote " and the eradication of the

property qualification) was a mistake. How can a society thrive if it does not

take pleasure in the crushing of its enemies? How can a society remain virtuous

if it does not delight in the justly earned pains suffered by the criminal?

Bring on the (primarily patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's

bring back public executions - television must be good for something.

BTW, I see that the French are starting to talk, at least, like men. Threatening

to rain nuclear death on their enemies, if your please. Who'da thunk it? Is that

one of the signs of the apocalypse? I'll have to review my _Left Behind_ books

to find out.

Best,

Dan

Best,

Dan

>

>

> Date: 2006/01/20 Fri PM 02:17:10 EST

> To: bigbangtango , bm729@...,

cory@...,

> michaelesp@..., grandmother_rock@...,

> rowan_ste_julian@..., jan.rodak@...,

> anewkindofchristian@..., thalia1959@...,

> exit-fundyism , progressivebooks ,

> rainbowsfbay , evccsocratescafe ,

> jung-fire , PalestinianChristians ,

> Olive-Tree-Peacewalk

> Subject: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women Don't)

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of politics. I grow

more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right - women's suffrage

(along, it must be said, with " one man one vote " and the eradication of the

property qualification) was a mistake. How can a society thrive if it does not

take pleasure in the crushing of its enemies? How can a society remain virtuous

if it does not delight in the justly earned pains suffered by the criminal?

Bring on the (primarily patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's

bring back public executions - television must be good for something.

BTW, I see that the French are starting to talk, at least, like men. Threatening

to rain nuclear death on their enemies, if your please. Who'da thunk it? Is that

one of the signs of the apocalypse? I'll have to review my _Left Behind_ books

to find out.

Best,

Dan

Best,

Dan

>

>

> Date: 2006/01/20 Fri PM 02:17:10 EST

> To: bigbangtango , bm729@...,

cory@...,

> michaelesp@..., grandmother_rock@...,

> rowan_ste_julian@..., jan.rodak@...,

> anewkindofchristian@..., thalia1959@...,

> exit-fundyism , progressivebooks ,

> rainbowsfbay , evccsocratescafe ,

> jung-fire , PalestinianChristians ,

> Olive-Tree-Peacewalk

> Subject: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women Don't)

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of politics. I grow

more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right - women's suffrage

(along, it must be said, with " one man one vote " and the eradication of the

property qualification) was a mistake. How can a society thrive if it does not

take pleasure in the crushing of its enemies? How can a society remain virtuous

if it does not delight in the justly earned pains suffered by the criminal?

Bring on the (primarily patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's

bring back public executions - television must be good for something.

BTW, I see that the French are starting to talk, at least, like men. Threatening

to rain nuclear death on their enemies, if your please. Who'da thunk it? Is that

one of the signs of the apocalypse? I'll have to review my _Left Behind_ books

to find out.

Best,

Dan

Best,

Dan

>

>

> Date: 2006/01/20 Fri PM 02:17:10 EST

> To: bigbangtango , bm729@...,

cory@...,

> michaelesp@..., grandmother_rock@...,

> rowan_ste_julian@..., jan.rodak@...,

> anewkindofchristian@..., thalia1959@...,

> exit-fundyism , progressivebooks ,

> rainbowsfbay , evccsocratescafe ,

> jung-fire , PalestinianChristians ,

> Olive-Tree-Peacewalk

> Subject: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women Don't)

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dan writes:>

> Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of politics.

> I grow more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right -

> women's suffrage (along, it must be said, with " one man one vote " and the

> eradication of the property qualification) was a mistake. How can a

> society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its

> enemies? How can a society remain virtuous if it does not delight in the

> justly earned pains suffered by the criminal? Bring on the (primarily

> patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's bring back public

> executions - television must be good for something.

>

Poor Dan! What did mommy do to you! She must have been a clever plotter ;-)

Carol

[Guest guest]

Carol Spicuzza wrote:

Dear Carol,

Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair psychoanalysis is

just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you wish.

And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among men,

insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

Regards,

Dan Watkins

Dan writes:>

> Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of

politics.

> I grow more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right

-

> women's suffrage (along, it must be said, with "one man one vote"

and the

> eradication of the property qualification) was a mistake. How can

a

> society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its

> enemies? How can a society remain virtuous if it does not delight

in the

> justly earned pains suffered by the criminal? Bring on the

(primarily

> patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's bring back

public

> executions - television must be good for something.

>

Poor Dan! What did mommy do to you! She must have been a clever plotter

;-)

Carol

[Guest guest]

Dear Dan,

I have read the "outrageous" you for years, but this is off the top. hoped you were joking, but I knew you weren't. You, my dear, are not outrageous, what you wrote is, in my opinion. Worse, to my mind, it is not truth.

I could perhaps swallow the Dan--ish part, but when you mention Ann Coulter I must protest. I find her in my judgment,the most hate-filled human being on TV .Let me put that better, I feel that what she writes and says (on TV) is hatefilled.( worse than that "foot-in-mouth Bible man). I find it hard to name my feelings on this a projection...I do not hate anyone, and my Shadow know this well. I do not react in anger, as I did when I first heard of her. I react swiftly by turning the TV to another channel so I will not have to deal with the emotions she could stir up in me if i gave her the power. Also , I am in awe of what can come out of the mouth of a beautiful intelligent woman.Perhaps beauty is indeed skin deep.

I decided you must have had either a melt-down or an "I'll wake up everybody" day.

How not to be ad hominem?" You meant to be outrageous.And I know you expected a reaction. I did not want to disappoint you. But I find what you wrote inconceivable for the Dan I have known.

I do answer your question:

"How can a > society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its > enemies? "

How can a society survive if it exults in "crushing" anyone? What is that about he who fights with a sword will die by the sword" ?? Take "pleasure" in destruction of a human life?

" delight in the justly earned pains suffered by..."

Who decides what is just? Not our convoluted justice system. Are you equipped to be a doer of "justice" Are you impartial? Are you, Dan a "righteous man" able to sit as judge? "Delight in pain" when did you become a sadist? No one else would ever "delight" in the pain of another, would they?

Your statements seem to me to be a burst of anger. That is all I can think. MY question then , what are you so angry about that it causes this kind of rant? If you tell me that is my projection, note the loaded words you used.I did not make up the meaning of those words.

Sorry, but how else to take your post? You knew when you wrote it, it would inflame and upset everyone.

Well, as for me personally...you did.

As always it is not you, friend, but your words which cause me to flinch. You are still the same you...just angry, i think.

love,

Toni

Re: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women Don't)

Carol Spicuzza wrote:Dear Carol,Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair psychoanalysis is just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you wish.And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among men, insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

Regards,Dan Watkins

Dan writes:>> Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of politics. > I grow more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right - > women's suffrage (along, it must be said, with "one man one vote" and the > eradication of the property qualification) was a mistake. How can a > society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its > enemies? How can a society remain virtuous if it does not delight in the > justly earned pains suffered by the criminal? Bring on the (primarily > patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's bring back public > executions - television must be good for something.>

[Guest guest]

----- >

> Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair psychoanalysis is

> just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you wish.

>

> And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among men,

> insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

>

You're right Dan, much too familiar, sorry. That seemed to be the spirit you

were writing in (not the personal teasing of course).

I'm guilty of reading your posts as teasing but I guess you were serious.

Fightin' words!? I thought you were looking for someone to " fight " with!

walking slowly away...

Carol

[Guest guest]

vienna19311 wrote:

Dear Toni,

Always a pleasure.

Dear Dan,

I have read the "outrageous" you for years, but

this is off the top. hoped you were joking, but I knew you

weren't. You, my dear, are not outrageous, what you wrote is, in my

opinion. Worse, to my mind, it is not truth.

I could perhaps swallow the Dan--ish part,

but when you mention Ann Coulter I must protest. I find her in my

judgment,the most hate-filled human being on TV .Let me put that

better, I feel that what she writes and says (on TV) is hatefilled.(

worse than that "foot-in-mouth Bible man). I find it hard to name my

feelings on this a projection...I do not hate anyone, and my Shadow

know this well. I do not react in anger, as I did when I first heard of

her. I react swiftly by turning the TV to another channel so I will not

have to deal with the emotions she could stir up in me if i gave her

the power. Also , I am in awe of what can come out of the mouth of a

beautiful intelligent woman.Perhaps beauty is indeed skin deep.

She is pretty easy on the eyes, isn't she? Brains, beauty, wisdom - a

full hand.

I decided you must have had either a

melt-down or an "I'll wake up everybody" day.

How not to be ad hominem?" You meant to be

outrageous.And I know you expected a reaction. I did not want to

disappoint you. But I find what you wrote inconceivable for the Dan I

have known.

I do answer your question:

"How can a

> society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its

> enemies? "

How can a society survive if it exults in

"crushing" anyone? What is that about he who fights with a sword will

die by the sword" ?? Take "pleasure" in destruction of a human life?

Depends on the human life.

" delight in the justly earned pains suffered

by..."

Who decides what is just?

The legislators and judges, of course.

Not our convoluted justice system. Are you

equipped to be a doer of "justice" Are you impartial? Are you, Dan a

"righteous man" able to sit as judge?

I didn't say that I should be the judge.

"Delight in pain" when did you become a sadist?

No one else would ever "delight" in the pain of another, would they?

Are you kidding?

Your statements seem to me to be a burst of

anger.

As a matter of fact, I was smiling and cheerful when I wrote it.

Sometimes I write in anger, but not that time. I don't usually joke

about the French when I'm angry.

That is all I can think. MY question then ,

what are you so angry about that it causes this kind of rant? If you

tell me that is my projection, note the loaded words you used.I did not

make up the meaning of those words.

Sorry, but how else to take your post? You knew

when you wrote it, it would inflame and upset everyone.

Somebody has to express the non-sacharine view around here, lest we all

end up with diabetes. You already knnow Jung's views on capital

punishment, if that is what has upset you, so I won't repeat them.

Best,

Dan

Well, as for me personally...you did.

As always it is not you, friend, but your words

which cause me to flinch. You are still the same you...just angry, i

think.

love,

Toni

-----

Original Message -----

From:

Dan

and Watkins

To:

JUNG-FIRE

Sent:

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:01 PM

Subject:

Re: When Bad People Are Punished, Men Smile (but Women

Don't)

Carol Spicuzza wrote:

Dear Carol,

Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair psychoanalysis is

just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you wish.

And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among men,

insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

Regards,

Dan Watkins

Dan

writes:>

> Another excellent reason, it seems, for most women to be out of

politics.

> I grow more and more inclined to believe that Ann Coulter is right

-

> women's suffrage (along, it must be said, with "one man one vote"

and the

> eradication of the property qualification) was a mistake. How can

a

> society thrive if it does not take pleasure in the crushing of its

> enemies? How can a society remain virtuous if it does not delight

in the

> justly earned pains suffered by the criminal? Bring on the

(primarily

> patriarchal) decent oligarchy. While we're at it, let's bring back

public

> executions - television must be good for something.

>

[Guest guest]

Carol Spicuzza wrote:

Dear Carol,

Dialectic should be friendly "fighting."

Regards,

Dan Watkins

----- >

> Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair

psychoanalysis is

> just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you

wish.

>

> And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among

men,

> insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

>

You're right Dan, much too familiar, sorry. That seemed to be the

spirit you

were writing in (not the personal teasing of course).

I'm guilty of reading your posts as teasing but I guess you were

serious.

Fightin' words!? I thought you were looking for someone to "fight" with!

walking slowly away...

Carol

[Guest guest]

Dear Dan,

But you bad mouthed my mom (and your mom) first.

I still don't think you're serious, though. Like you said, you just wanted

to stir things up.

Carol

Dan wrote:

> Dialectic should be friendly " fighting. "

>

> Regards,

>

> Dan Watkins

>

>>

>> ----- >

>> > Sorry, but I don't take the ad hominem bait. Armchair psychoanalysis is

>> > just begging the question. Engage my argument or don't, as you wish.

>> >

>> > And, in all seriousness, kindly leave my mother out of it. Among men,

>> > insults against one's mother constitute fighting words.

>> >

>> You're right Dan, much too familiar, sorry. That seemed to be the

>> spirit you

>> were writing in (not the personal teasing of course).

>> I'm guilty of reading your posts as teasing but I guess you were serious.

>> Fightin' words!? I thought you were looking for someone to " fight " with!

>>

>> walking slowly away...

>> Carol

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby

>> beings may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and

>> suffering. "

>>

>> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>>

>>

>>